So I had a look at the Alaska bush trip and was surprised how good the satellite textures looked in the pictures. I’d heard Alaska had satellite data and mesh issues. I decided to fly the same route with another plane and realised the scenery I saw looked nothing like the images asobo provided, particularly the first 2-3 airports. For example the first airport in Unalaska there’s no snow and the satellite data looks great. In the sim, it’s covered in snow and there isn’t any satellite data. It’s generic low res textures. Same for the next few airports. Anyone else experienced this? Any reason for the big difference?
Cannot say I have noticed any problems, but then I just enjoy what scenery there is. Have flown up to leg 6 so far and loving it.
Ok thanks. Did you think your scenery matches the pictures in the bush trip section though? For example is the first airport covered in snow in your sim? It isn’t in the picture. Thanks
I fly in Alaska a lot and IMHO the scenery there is hit and miss. I suspect that the AI process that merges in replacement textures over areas that have poor satellite coverage or where there were clouds in the images tends to be more prevalent in this region. And sometimes the mountains look amazing and sometimes meh.
But the Alaska bush trip is fun nonetheless. To me it’s pretty amazing how people will settle in the most remote, inhospitable areas of the world.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.