That’s why I said generally. 
being its a Sim, you can do anything you want so IRL procedures is only for those who want to follow them.
In my opinion, it is a simulator of flying according to aviation rules and aircraft specifications. Not a simulator of misbehaving (like flying at ten metres height between houses and complaining that you can’t look in through the windows) or putting your aircraft in situations outside of its design limits (like artificially setting the altitude of a Cssna 172 to 40,000 feet and then complaining that it behaves “unrealistically”).
2 Likes
I suspected this from the start and I think you are 100% correct.
Good to see you still here BTW 
I wish X Plane would do a deal with google, that would put the cat amongst the pigeons!
1 Like
that is your opinion, i have mine.
By definition a “simulator”
A simulation video game describes a diverse super-category of video games, generally designed to closely simulate real world activities. A simulation game attempts to copy various activities from real life in the form of a game for various purposes such as training, analysis, or prediction.
take a note of that very last word: Prediction, changing the R/W attributes of known limitations and altering them to outside of such limitations to predict what may or may not happen.
Because FS Flight Sim gives us the options to disable crashes ( yeah good luck doing that in the real world of aviation, have unlimited fuel - heh, another one.
take a regular aircraft to 275000 Feet and then let it fly is definitely not real world procedures, yup, id love to see any plane portrayed in FS, fly in the Mesosphere in the R/W.
the point is, we all have opinions, you fly yours how you want, ill fly mine how i want ( like flying the A320 without the Autotrim, bank and pitch limiters disabled by disabling SEC Systems 2 and 3 )
If i want to fly RW Procedures, i will, if i want to do goofy things, i will. because the sim allows us to. if the goal was to provide strictly R/W Procedures, we would not have the rule bending and rule breaking options we do.
please do enlighten me where someone has said this? you have been here for 3 days, ive been here in these forums since December 11th of 2019, i have NEVER seen someone complain about doing that. in fact more jokes and funny comments have been made about that, especially when the altitude limit was 5 million feet … yeah, flying a plane where some extreme-low orbit satellites orbit the earth was definitely NOT R/W procedures, id love to see a plane in R/W Terms fly in the Thermosphere.
If R/W Aviation rules were in play, MS and Asobo did a HORRIBLE job of creating and matching them. R/W Aviation rules dont allow for random names of gates, taxiways, calling a handful of airlines “Generic”, spacing planes landing at international airports less than 300 feet apart, using incorrect landing light systems on runways, incorrect procedures for airport beacons and mis-guiding ILS systems. not classifying TFR’s and Permanent Restricted Airspaces like the NSSS, Area-51, Washington D.C.'s Secure Airspace, Defining MOA’s ( off limits to airliners and general aviation ), among a thousand other things that are considered R/W Procedures and regulations. so please, spare me the “its meant for R/W flying only” because its not. and as a retired Medical SAR/HEMS Helicopter pilot with nearly 4000 Hours of flying time over the skies of Atlanta GA, i would know.
in other words, your opinion is yours, mine is mine. lets not make a issue of this, or continue to discuss it since its off topic.
1 Like
How one person chooses to impose self inflicted rules on how they think the sim should be used is their business just as it is other peoples choice to break those rules if they wish too.
8 Likes
thank you, exactly the concept of a sim
2 Likes
You can disable PG for now (under Data). I do it sometimes if I’m flying below 3000 AGL…the “melty” look is pretty awful.
1 Like
Honestly I’m pretty satisfied with it currently. I came from thousands of hours in XPlane with many gbs of scenery and mesh, and this looks magnificent, and surely will only improve in time.
5 Likes
Then don’t moan about the scenery not looking 100% when skimming rooftops; it’s not made for that.
2 Likes
please show me where im moaning over rather factually explaining why the sim looks the way it looks?
i could honestly care less about looking in windows, sure, i have said it would be awesome to do and referenced the movie “Blue Thunder” mostly in threads about helicopters, but, not once have i actually complained about it.
find someone else to twist words and comments please
2 Likes
Hello, I’ve noticed this issue as soon as I went for my first flight at KVNY and KWHP airports. It ruined the whole sim experience for me. weird looking objects, terrain texture not loading properly, mesh not aligned with the surrounding, tress in the water and on the highways in LA area. The draw distance is poor. I have i7 4 core 4.6ghz, 24GB 2400 RAM, 1080TI, SSD medium to high settings. The sim needs lots of work…
2 Likes
at ground level, photoggrametry will be not good, it’s not hand made scenery, (unless you turn photoggrametry to off) but on higher altitude you can do this for now, waiting MSFS to increase this. PSA: LOD Slider Can Be Increased Past 200 - Dramatically Improves Photogrammatery
There is already thread for improvement with vote here Ground texture - Low resolution - Internet incorrect Bandwidth
well, i started sims from eagle strike ega, and for sure don’t get that time with cga graphic, as hadn’t pc, first sim was may be not f-15 but f-117 ega too, kesmai air warrior i guess some later, and flanker 1.0 1.5 jane’s hornet and apache and ww2fighters and flight simulator 95, from microsoft it was first i guess, so sure, i relatively kid 
but only relatively in this context, and in collective context i think stay absolutely i forgot literally callsigns of other games, but was many of them like comache comache 2 comache 3, in any way, i think that’s time jane’s was the best company, would be if some jane’s’s guys stay work in simulators industry, may be in some addons fsx/p3d company i forgot so many simulators, enemy engaged, you will not believe, i didn’t flew fs9 ever, that’s time i flew il-2 sturmovic online from 2002 i guess, or about that, so fsx was first after ms98,… ah no, i flew ms2000 too lol, and when i upgrade pentium3/voodoo(dont remember model) to q8200/gt9500 i start fsx some, but crysis and far cry 2 was so cool, so why i remember, and i just yesterday replayed crysis remastered, so 2008 is not when i start lol
1 Like
I believe this is why they limited the zoom level from the cockpit. They knew the PG couldn’t be so sharp in the distance - it would cripple our PC’s.
2 Likes
According to Microsoft, the fix is to clean the cache in the simulator.
By the way, they did mention to clean the cache after every update and restart the game.
Tried this already, many times
Didn’t help
Great idea, but your description shows your lack of understanding how photogrammetry works in sim. The entire photogrammetric layer is an additional “mesh” that is overlayed on top of the existing DEM. There is no “data” that the sim uses to differentiate between bush, rock, tree, mountain, or building. It is all one altitude mesh that they “drape” the photography data over like you would drape a sheet over pillows on your bed.
As a result, you can’t go in after the fact and simply flatten and disable select portions of the mesh. That is one of the reasons that night lighting on photogrammetric skyscrapers is so awful. The AI can basically pick out skyscrapers due to the abrupt change of elevation data and “position” and apply a really poor night lighting generic texture to the side, but it’s really rather poor. Go down the Strip in Las Vegas at night if you want an example…
And since “autogen” resides on your own machine, then the “AI” you propose would have to be running on your client machine to do this, which is a lot to ask of a CPU that is already pretty much maxing out. So the performance hit you propose is tremendous, if it could be done.
And even if it could be done, the performance hit on rendering is also a concern. A lot of freeware developers have injected Google Maps data into MSFS using blender and even included different LOD’s and that area can cripple frame rates. Especially when used over wide areas. Yeah, replacing Devils Tower or Mount Rushmore might not cause a problem, but the larger the area, the larger the hit.
As other’s have mentioned. Google Maps has 10x the photogrammetric data as Bing. So Microsoft should just increase their Bing Maps photogrammetric data gratis? Maybe if we had a subscription model that would help pay for the increased storage space, and the cost of obtaining the increased photogrammetric data? But we know how well that would go over as well.
As far as Google making a flight simulator? They already put a basic one in Google Earth. And that’s it. So that should tell you how much interest they have of expanding that idea.
My suggestion? Instead of having what you want, try wanting what you have. We have an incredible sim as it is. Even with Photogrammetry turned off, buildings and tree’s are generally where they are supposed to be. If you want a cohesive world, you can turn off photogrammetry and all areas in sim will look the same. If you want to “sightsee” then turn it on, and deal with the melty buildings and rocks that are a part of this fledgling technology.
1 Like
I agree. This is a very real issue and needs to be discussed. It’s unfortunate we can’t have a discussion with Asobo about it more directly though.
In any case, they set a baseline of what to expect. At launch, we didn’t have these photogrammetry issues. Like at all. Objects were fully loaded and looked good by the time they were close enough to see. The world looked amazing. I can remember being just amazed by how real everything looked and from how far away we were able to see photogrammetry detail.
Now we fly over areas that look like post-apocalyptic melted wastelands that will maybe or maybe not pop into “normal” existence when we’re right over them. Or behind us. Or not at all. Although in fairness, if you fly around an area long enough, most of it will eventually spawn, but that shouldn’t happen.
I can’t speak for others, but this started happening for me with the Japan update. Since then it’s gotten worse and worse every subsequent patch. Asobo seem clueless to the fact this problem even exists and can’t see it or recreate it according to what was said 2 Q&A sessions ago.
I’m hoping that they did find the issue and are including it as part of the USA update next week.Although considering that both LOD and Photogrammetry are listed as being in their backlog, I don’t think it’s getting very high priority atm.
4 Likes
I was around since launch and I noticed the melted wastelands immediately. I just was so amazed by what I was seeing that I pretty much dismissed it.
I think much of us are victims of “new car syndrome” where for the first couple of months, our new car is perfect and we love every part of it, and then as we get used to it, we start noticing the imperfections of it. And in some cases, those imperfections become a bigger an bigger issue, and a larger annoyance.
I was ALWAYS aware of the limits of the photogrammetry and noticed the Pyramidy look as they popped in. The Japan Update did nothing to change this. But I was focusing, at the time, of being able to fly over my house, so it was no big deal.
Now, the novelty has worn off, and I find myself switching between Photogrammetry on and off depending on my mood.
2 Likes