ORBX Northern Rocky Mountains negative review; can anyone confirm? Or deny?

tracyq144 · Mar 23, 2011

ORBX Northern Rocky Mountains negative review; can anyone confirm? Or deny?

I really want to get this, as it's the only Orbx AU area that I am even remotely familiar with, but this review kind of scares me.

http://www.flightsimstore.com/product_reviews_info.php?products_id=1488&reviews_id=640&osCsid=motnmhacc9etdbd6ler0pkm8s7

I have PNW and love it, but couldn't tell you how accurate it is, I just took the accuracy on faith. So there could be glaring errors and I wouldn't really know it. NRM, though, I would.

W. Bleddyn · Mar 23, 2011

Well I live in the Northern part of the region covered in PNW and it is covered fairly well. A few things like the Peace Arch border crossing would have been nice, but all in all pretty accurate. I find a little more so on the US side. The Canadian parts of the NRM coverage I have driven through several times, but I wouldn't say I know all the landmarks really well and from what I know it looked pretty good. I wouldn't be as picky as someone who lived in the area though.

I do know that NRM is part of Orbx NA, not OrbX AU though

AndyE1976 · Mar 23, 2011

It depends on how well you know the area as to whether it would be a problem or not. This isn't photoscenery, so it's going to be different to reality, however it's certainly going to be closer to what it should look like than the default scenery.

When I fly ORBX AU, I don't have any first hand experience to determine whether it is realistic or not, but it feels right, the terrain looks right and it performs well. There is sufficent variation to avoid those patterns that are inherently unrealistic and a feature of the default scenery. Check New World Mailer on Catalogue AU.

I still prefer photoscenery as I like the real-world view, but ORBX does a great job with its product and the more time spent with it the better it appears.

1 of 7 people criticise it, and then mainly because they know the area.

Roger · Mar 23, 2011

I buy FTX scenery because it looks so good and the textures are the most realistic I've seen. However it isn't photoscenery as Andy says so if you're looking for your house you wont see it.

Warrant · Mar 23, 2011

Any screenshots?

vora · Mar 23, 2011

Well, the first place to look would be the product page ofc
Lots of shots and a video:
http://fullterrain.com/product_nanrm.html

Slund · Mar 24, 2011

I have PNW in the sim and fly in this area all the time in real life, it's good, really good.

Dain Arns · Mar 24, 2011

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w

ontVertAlignCellWithSp/> <w

ontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/> <w

ontVertAlignInTxbx/> <w:Word11KerningPairs/> <w:CachedColBalance/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> [FONT=&quot]One out of seven harsh “criticism”, or honest “non-fanboi” review? :icon_lol:

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]NRM is being compared to the standard set by PNW, and against competing landclass products.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]That is more than fair, in my personal opinion.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]More than reasonable to expect a product that has been touted as ‘more accurate’ than others to at least rise somewhat to the bar set by its sister product, PNW.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Correct?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]There were never any expectations made of reality, photoscenery, or ‘Seeing my own house”.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Perhaps some of you should have taken the time to actually read the review.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]But a picture is more believable than someone’s written word these days, isn’t it.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]So, let's get to it, shall we?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Scenery set at Extremely Dense.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Autogen set at Very Dense.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Level of Detail Radius: Large[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Winter textures used to show contrast between UTX (with GEX textures), and Orbx landclasses and textures.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](These are two competing landclass/texture products I own. I think we all know what default looks like, but I’m not going to include it in comparison.)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Okay, let’s start with the towns. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Here’s an example of Florence, Montana, which is a short distance south of Missoula (KMSO) in the Bitterroot Valley:[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]UTX at least shows some accuracy of US Highway 93, a railroad siding, and an actual town. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]On the same settings, well, Orbx shows no town at all, for the most part.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In fact this is the condition of Orbx ‘Urban’ landclass in general for most of the NRM area, in my experience with the product, so far.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]As I said in my review, some towns don’t exist at all.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]If you are to believe Orbx NRM, western Montana is mostly vacant open space.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It is not in the valleys for the most part.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In fact most of the population lives in western Montana.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]There are many small towns, and folks that own small acreages in this area.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I mean I could show example after example after example across the area, but I would hope this makes the point.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Still don’t believe me? Look up the area in Google Earth then.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Moving on to road ways…[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Here’s an example of Interstate 90, just north of the Missoula Airport (KMSO):[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Again, UTX gets it right, although admittedly somewhat rough looking.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Interstate 90 is not simply a 4 lane road as depicted by NRM in this comparison.[/FONT]
This unfortunately this also seems to be the norm for major roads depicted in NRM.
[FONT=&quot]Also again, note the lack of ‘urban sprawl’ in Orbx NRM, which exists in the UTX landclass around the Missoula area.[/FONT]
This area should have buildings, as UTX correctly shows.

[FONT=&quot]Another point on roads.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A good VFR route is following along I-90 west from Missoula to Coeur d’Alene, Idaho.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]When you do fly along this 200 mile or so corridor, you become very aware that Interstate 90 has no bridges, or road crossings textures at all across rivers.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]You can see that UTX does.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Picky? River crossings were depicted just fine in PNW.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Finally, Glacier National Park, looking north from Lake McDonald towards ‘Going To The Sun’:.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Okay, probably somewhat more personal on this one.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]And yes I am displaying a comparison to freeware photo scenery to make a point.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Glacier/Waterton National Park is beautiful.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It doesn’t deserve the generic landclass treatment.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]We were treated to the extra touch of photoscenery blending of many of the peaks and volcanoes in PNW.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]So I really don’t think it’s too much to have expected similar treatment for Glacier, Jasper, and Banff National Parks.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Oh, and if anyone from Orbx is reading this, Flathead Lake, Lake Pend Oreille, and Lake Coeur d’Alene for the most part as a rule of thumb, do not completely freeze over, as was depicted by NRM this winter.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](Yes, there have been rare instances where they do. Rare.)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]So NRM is all bad.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]NO.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]There is good.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]As I stated in my review, the mesh and vegetation landclasses are spot on.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The most accurate I have ever seen and definitely exceeded my expectations.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The airports are also very well done and about as good as you can get by using the Orbx scenery objects library.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Yes, I DO use still NRM.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Quite bluntly, in my opinion, it looks much better.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Especially the textures vs. the generic GEX ones.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]But I will not apologize to the ‘fanbois’ who sensibilities have been upset.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I will not give a product like this 5 out of 5 stars simply because it was released![/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It has accuracy errors.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]And folks that are looking to buy this product should be made aware of that fact.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It’s called Honesty.[/FONT] :salute:

[FONT=&quot]Accuracy errors in important landclasses, which if corrected, would definitely raise my score of this product.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]And especially the addition of blended photoscenery to those mentioned National Parks.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In summary, I don't think my expectations are out of line with a product that is supposed to be, by my understanding, comparable to PNW.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]As it stands, since half of the product has some major accuracy errors, in my experienced and person opinion of the NRM area, 2.5 stars out of 5 is the assessment I will stand behind quite firmly.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Thank you.[/FONT]

Roger · Mar 24, 2011

Well Dain,
I preferred this review where it was, on the Flightsim store site as it will probably raise controversy here which we prefer to avoid if possible. On a personal note I don't consider myself a "fanboi" and my comment about not seeing your own house was not aimed at your review, just drawing the line between FTX and photo scenery. What I do like are the airports and texture sets which in my opinion are unmatched so far for FsX. I don't live there so total accuracy isn't required for my pleasure.

Roger.

W. Bleddyn · Mar 24, 2011

You made use of the word picky with a question mark. Since I was the only person to use that word, I will assume it was a question directed at me.

I stated that in my limited, but not completely unfamiliar knowledge of the Canadian areas of NRM, (I will stress again that I said the Canadian areas, so not Montana) the scenery is rendered close enough to make me happy, but someone who lives there may be more picky. How is that derogatory towards you or your review pray tell?

vora · Mar 24, 2011

Thanks a lot for this very detailed review, Dain.
Seems the bigger the scenery coverages are the more deductions you have to make from accuracy. I bet people living in the PNW or PFJ areas will also have something to tell.
The thing is users who don't live there do not see the mistakes because they don't know. I live approx. 8000 miles away and don't know these details about western Montana. What I see are the differences of the "overall picture" in regards to default, UTX/GEX and FTX. For instance, flying through NRM I was really surprised how dry these areas are this up north (the "rain shadow" of the coast range is bigger than I thought).

Realistically we only have the choice of UTX/GEX or FTX. The first is very accurate with infrastructure and urban settlements, the latter with texture sets and landclass. I guess my preference for FTX partly comes from living in "overcrowded" central Europe... in foreign places landscapes are simply more important to me than accurate infrastructure... call it escapism :icon_lol:

If I were living in that area, flying VFR there in RL, I'd probably prefer UTX/GEX...

PS: The inaccurancies about Jasper, Banff or Glacier NP are a bummer though... especially since I was looking forward to Yellowstone in the upcoming CRM region :frown:

Daube · Mar 24, 2011

Dain, thanks a lot for your review.
I am a kind of OrbX "fanboy" indeed, but seeing such objective reviews is greatly appreciated in fact, because it really gives a concrete view about the quality of the product.

The various problems that you showed in the pictures are indeed some bad points, especially for a product that is meant to please the VFR pilots like myself. Most critical is the last shot which shows that the landclass for the nationnal park is in fact quite poor. But I know the overall quality of the product is quite good anyway, and probably OrbX will solve those problems in one of the future support packages, hopefully.

JayKae · Mar 24, 2011

We are always working on our product and any feedback is appreciated and taken on board. We have been putting out patches, fixes and customer request/feedback alterations to our products since day one and we will venture to keep doing this. So thank you very much for your review and I would not call it negative at all to be honest, constructive criticism is probably the better phrase for it

koorby · Mar 24, 2011

We'll cop any criticism on the chin, no problems at all. After all, it's the feedback and exact reports such as these which make our product better.

In fact, we just released a major PFJ.001 service pack for Pacific Fjords yesterday and the release notes show how the dev team have specifically responded to many customer reports on our forums. In the past week alone we've released six patches or service packs for airports and regions. The FTX Australia region is now into its SP4 release, representing many hundreds of hours of remedial fixes and further enhancement - none of which we charge our customers for.

So can I please suggest that you report this and other anomalies on our forums so we can schedule a landclass re-sweep of specific areas which are less than accurate.

Our landclass is crafted by hand using direct comparisons to sources like Google Earth, maps and other geodata, so in this instance it's human error which you can see here. Even being as parochial as we can be in Australia, we missed complete towns in our home country which we had to add in later. Even this week I've gotten an email from a customer with a specific landclass fix request at Lismore airport, which we'll of course fix as well.

Don't worry, we'll certainly fix it as we've done to all our products since our debut release in 2008.

We've never made claims of perfection in terms of LC cover, particularly given how we make it by hand. But our scenery does have that non-mechanical "soul" to it, which is why it's so popular worldwide.

txnetcop · Mar 24, 2011

You really can't beat this for customer support. Thanks guys and I agree that constructive criticism is a good thing!
Ted

Roger · Mar 24, 2011

John,
Thanks for the hu about the PFJ update.
If the thread stays civil it will remain open and it seems pretty well handled so far :engel016:

Killbilly · Mar 24, 2011

koorby said:
We'll cop any criticism on the chin, no problems at all. After all, it's the feedback and exact reports such as these which make our product better.

Don't worry, we'll certainly fix it as we've done to all our products since our debut release in 2008.

We've never made claims of perfection in terms of LC cover, particularly given how we make it by hand. But our scenery does have that non-mechanical "soul" to it, which is why it's so popular worldwide.

This is the sort of thing that will keep me buying ORBX products as long as they keep selling them.

Also, I hope when they release their coverage of the southern Rockies (where I live) they don't forget the beautiful Uinta Mountains in Utah (where I spend most of every summer). Wink-wink. Nudge-nudge.

FLighT01 · Mar 24, 2011

Not sure if the Southern Rockies will include the Yosemite area, but I would like to see a highly detailed and accurate Yosemite Park with all the natural sights to see there done up right. Even as an addon, I'd buy it. We have plenty of city and airport addons, and I think a case can be made for scenic scenery addons of geological / biological sites of interest as well. The famous stone formations and waterfalls in Yosemite. Yellowstone also comes to mind, geysers anyone? Bison and Elk and Wolves...

W. Bleddyn · Mar 24, 2011

koorby said:
In fact, we just released a major PFJ.001 service pack for Pacific Fjords yesterday

Thank you! I hadn't noticed, but after installing I see that Hartley Bay BC's listing has been fixed! (It was listed as Brisish, not British Columbia for those that missed it.) It was a small detail, but I know the place well so it was noticeable enough to me.

Now for a flight in the region in Piglets new plane

rwmarth · Mar 24, 2011

I had been really looking forward to FTX NRM as it's the only area by Orbx I had been. Glacier NP should have been the centerpiece of the package and having read the reviews on its lack of anything special like was shown with custom textures and photoreal in PNW. For this reason, the simplicity of Glacier, I have held off on purchasing. If a service pack adds some more detail to the area, and having read the forums, much of the lack of detail is not intentional but related to technical limitations, I'd certainly puchase it. But if not, then I will just be waiting for Yellowstone and Teton areas in the Central Rocky Mountains package and hope for the best. That all being said, Orbx does do a great job and find them to be the topnotch scenery developers out there.

ORBX Northern Rocky Mountains negative review; can anyone confirm? Or deny?

Charter Member

Charter Member

Charter Member 2011

Senior Administrator

Videre Vincere Est

Charter Member

Charter Member

Senior Member

Senior Administrator

Charter Member

Charter Member

SOH-CM-2025

Charter Member

Charter Member

Charter Member

Senior Administrator

SOH-CM-2025

Charter Member

Charter Member

Charter Member