• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Might wanna be sitting down for this one...

Bjoern said:
I've found making photoscenery very easy.

But other than for scenery development, I'm not seeing any use for a purely flat texture (with mesh elevations).

With autogen, however...
Click to expand...

Installing the photo scenery does seem to cause autogen objects to go away. However, that is not always bad; I noticed with the MegaCITY USA 2005 - Dallas/Fort Worth scenery that autogen buildings were being placed on top of roads, and other such silliness.

It doesn't remove buildings built into the scenery, or airport objects; here are some shots of Las Vegas with photo scenery showing both:





Photo scenery looks best from 3,000 to 5,000 ft anyway. I think it is better to intelligently place some landmarks in the right locations than to let autogen place objects in the wrong places. (If you don't know a city very well; autogen does a respectable job; but photo scenery is nice if you know a city well, and want to see all of the streets, buildings, railways and other landmarks in their correct locations.)

-James
 
extrudinator said:
Hmmmm.

It looks like Microsoft is run by a lunatic and a guy who wants to relive his glory days at the University of Illinois. Maybe Microsoft IS dead??

If you click on the words "The Metaverse" in my post it will take you to the Wiki article explaining what it is. It's the future of computing. One day you will don your Track IR-like device and go shopping on Gates Street in downtown Virtual City and just move around and interact with other people just like moving around and interacting in the "real" world. Communicate by voice (interpreted if required) and do business just as if you could move around the globe at will (like Superman)-- because you WILL be able to move around the globe at will. Don't like the price that guy is charging for Number 4 Wing Nuts? Go shopping in South Africa or take a side trip to Smolensk. Compare prices from around the world and set up deals without ever leaving your home office.

Is there a problem with shipping? Troubleshoot your delivery in The Metaverse. The merging of this "reality" with "virtual reality" will become more and more seamless over time. Eventually, we will swap back and forth from one "reality" to the other without blinking. All interfaces will become one.

This is twenty years in the future. Get ready for it. If Microsoft messes up at this stage they will be out of the game.
Click to expand...

You are correct............this is the future of computing---the merge of two worlds.
 
jhefner said:
(If you don't know a city very well; autogen does a respectable job; but photo scenery is nice if you know a city well, and want to see all of the streets, buildings, railways and other landmarks in their correct locations.)
Click to expand...

Even *if* I know a city very well, I gladly let FSX take a bit of artistic license when it comes to terrain accuracy.
Photoscenery simply ruins everything for me. I prefer an approximate rendition of everything instead of one feature excelling at something (terrain accuracy) at the cost of another feature (depth perception).
I stopped flying from the 2D panel for similar reasons.
 
Bjoern said:
Even *if* I know a city very well, I gladly let FSX take a bit of artistic license when it comes to terrain accuracy.
Photoscenery simply ruins everything for me. I prefer an approximate rendition of everything instead of one feature excelling at something (terrain accuracy) at the cost of another feature (depth perception).
I stopped flying from the 2D panel for similar reasons.
Click to expand...

To each his own; and maybe it is also part of the difference in the experience of flying in FSX vs FS9/FS8 (which is what I am used to) - the autogen is THAT much better in FSX. But, for me, it is both more pleasant and easier to fly VFR (in my case around the Dallas/Ft. Worth Texas metroplex) with photoscenery then with the sparse and often inaccurate autogen scenery.

-James
 
Bjoern said:
Even *if* I know a city very well, I gladly let FSX take a bit of artistic license when it comes to terrain accuracy.
Photoscenery simply ruins everything for me. I prefer an approximate rendition of everything instead of one feature excelling at something (terrain accuracy) at the cost of another feature (depth perception).
I stopped flying from the 2D panel for similar reasons.
Click to expand...


I am with Hefner on this.

Having flown so much earlier in life, been a student for a while, its the ground that you follow, noting your position and surroundings, landmarks, etc. Even in night flights, you check your location via highways (street lit of course), unless you are in IFR weather running the VOR's.

I much rather have real scenery then artificial, if its possible to have. And I'll take it without Autogen, espeically when you are up at 3,000 feet plus and looking down on them anyways. The terrain will 'appear' to have autogen and a 3D surface from the real world shading anyways. Only on landings and taking off do you see the autogen, which you will have at airports anyways.

Thats my personal preference though. My humble 2 cents.


Man, I would pay for TileProxy, I love it so much, lol... It is 'kick-boot!' :d Flying over new villages in the South of France, through the Alps near Innsbruck or Vienna, through the mountains of Colorado.. Oh man! Makes my palms sweaty thinking about it...



Bill
 
I think MS has found that most Flight Simmers can't keep up with the technology and don't buy new computers everytime they come out with a new Flight Simulator, as in the FSX version.

I think we will still be flying 20 years, even if it is called FSX. The addons will keep it updated.
 
Good point Eliezer,

except that this time around, the technology wasnt released yet. DX10 wasnt out, DX10 capable graphics cards werent out. DX10 could only run on vista and that was in the process of being released. The chips (dual cores) werent running properly (at first) to enable faster smoother running of FSX. It was many months (I want to say over a year) before people could buy parts or entire computers that could run FSX smoothly with sliders at 75%.

It also showed us that you could spend $5,000.00 USD on a pro built gaming computer and still not run FSX smoothly.

At least now, 2 years later, there are a percentage of people that can now run it at full sliders, (100% of the sim).



Bill
 
Lionheart said:
I much rather have real scenery then artificial, if its possible to have. And I'll take it without Autogen, espeically when you are up at 3,000 feet plus and looking down on them anyways. The terrain will 'appear' to have autogen and a 3D surface from the real world shading anyways. Only on landings and taking off do you see the autogen, which you will have at airports anyways.
Click to expand...

I agree Bill. Most of the buildings are horrid little boxes anyway best seen from a few thousand ft except for the odd good bit of payware. :applause:
 
Shameless plug, I suppose? But this was posted at the Flight1 forums and looks promising. I haven't seen it within the sim, so the true effects remain to be seen.

http://www.simforums.com/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=30107

I've been a customer of Allen's work since the USA Roads product and work with him now as a tester. His work has always advanced the simming experience for me and I think Product 'X' will continue to do the same.

I spent many a year traveling the interstates of America and many of it's backroads, so to see an area from above where I had experienced it at flight level 11' before is entertaining.

As mentioned in the posting there will be texture work done to eliminate the fake roads and other stuff that comes with default textures.
 
Meshman said:
As mentioned in the posting there will be texture work done to eliminate the fake roads and other stuff that comes with default textures.
Click to expand...

Development time: Ten years.

Since it would basically mean redrawing most of FSX's ground textures.
 
That is an awesome looking tool.

I have delved into the SDK and have built software to recognize road maps to create vectors for roads in FSX.... but recognizing individual building footprints.... WoW. :faint:
 
Meshman said:
Shameless plug, I suppose? But this was posted at the Flight1 forums and looks promising. I haven't seen it within the sim, so the true effects remain to be seen.

http://www.simforums.com/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=30107
Click to expand...

An addon like this will make a staggering difference. It will truly be "the biggest thing to ever happen to FS", unlike that megascenery thing. It deserves its own thread on here, not mixed in with the downfall of ACES.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top