Have not played since September 2020. Did it always look that bad? Data is On, everything in Ultra and maxed out. Picked a location in France to make sure quality is best (recent world update).
Bing Maps Location
MFS, Bing data on and streaming
MFS, Bing Data off (obviously worse, just to make sure it was on before)
At least compare at the same magnification/zoom level.
To me it looks quite good and acceptable in the sim, actually.
That green tint must go
Yes, probably due to their color correction.
In the last Q&A this was mentioned (green roads).
Basically because they have a lot of images from various sources, taken at various times of day and different dates.
In order for them to make all imagery somewhat coherent they apply color correction. Of course this is mostly on green tints. and in some cases this makes roads and other object look green as well.
They are working on a better way of color correction so that roads and other objects are not affected.
Judging from the screenshots I’d say that the resolution is more or less the same. The same details are visible, only there are some color issues.
You can zoom in to see the difference in quality better. The MFS satellite data looks like every second pixel is left out or some other ‘compression’ magic. Airport is LFQG.
I notice this difference in quality everywhere. Maybe the simply can not stream the full res images from Bing maps for performance reasons?
it is the same zoom level. The difference is noticable everywhere. You can pop your own bing maps open and compare anywhere.
No it isn’t.
I can even manually bring your screenshots to the same size and it looks a lot better already.
Apart from that, yes the edges look a little smoothed out, or unsharp, in the sim. But what do you expect, there is only so much you can feed into a graphics card. Perhaps in a few years time when everyone has a card with ten times the memory capacity and processing speed…
Now everybody is already complaining about the performance.
And about the details when you are almost parking your plane on the ground… come on it is a flight simulator, not a high res, 3D world simulator.
Is it possible that the little pilot might be bias because of their negative experience and comments that were contributed previously. 
it is easy to create your own quality experience and post it here. IMO, using mostly ultra and few high settings, there is very crisp quality in this sim. My experience…
Yes, the Bing images in the simulator are definitely lower resolution/compressed compared to Bing maps (=smoothed out edges, less details,…). I was just expecting the real Bing maps images because the options say ‘high quality Bing maps’ when you enable them.
I have a 11GB Vram RTX 2080Ti. You can fit a lot in there. I just say what everyone thinks: Lower image quality because it has to fit into an Xbox video memory 
What are your settings for Texture resolution, Texture supersampling, Texture synthesin?
Stated this before, and will state it again, the XBox Series X performs a lot better than the laptops most of the PC crowd try to run this sim on. So stop pointing at the XBox release as a scapegoat.
They’ve AI generated the entire planet, and it all comes bundled with the sim so you don’t have to manually store terabytes of ortho data. Will it always be as pristine as the best singular satellite image you can find? Of course not. The AI uses multiple photo’s from different seasons, weather conditions etc etc. to come to this entire planet (needs colour-correcting, removing clouds etc etc). So it’s logical it’ll be slightly lower quality than a singular image.
Yes quality of images in sim is worse then actual bing maps itself. Anyone who doesn’t see this has something wrong with their eyes. Always the useless discussions wether it’s right or wrong is annoying. It’s a clear post with clear screenshots that clearly show the difference.
Anyway. Probably has to do with texture size. Getting all aerial imgaes at their max resolution in the sim would eat up memory like crazy. Not to fotget it all has to stream to your pc while still being fast enough combined with all the other data. Also the same images need to be seen from different altidudes while bing maps can just replace them with different images for differeny hieghts.
But to be honest, bing maps itself is allready horrible compared to google. It’s really outdated and microsoft didn’t really bother with it too much in the years before msfs was planned i guess.
Yes, this! And also the other way around… is my experience.
This phenomenon actually has a name: it’s called a ‘discussion’.
But on topic. The above photos look great to me. As I posted earlier in a different topic. When you’d lower your expectations from Ultra to High, you won’t be disappointed and fly happily ever after.
Now if you’d please ‘scuse me when I kiss the sky…
Bye bye, happy 🪰 (-ing)
Lower quality/resolution is one thing.
Calling it ‘horrible’ is something different (especially considering that the quallity is not thát much lower). Wording matters.
Yes if they could stream the textures with the speed and quality bing maps has would be awesome!
Probably an artifact of the AI combining multiple satellite images and doing colour corrections between the different images to stitch them all together into the world you see below you.
LOL I have a few ideas 
I think it will depends on where you are. It is like google earth: in important huge cities, the data are constantly updated, in high resolution…but in small cities and rural area, the last update was around 2016, with low-res images
And, for sure, asobo is already aware about complains related to low resolution ground (as it can be seen at their wishlist)
not even the same map it seems. The cars in front of the building to the right are complete missing. Other than that, you can actually cleary see lower quality ingame, for examle at road markings in satellite vs game.
