Comparison: Game vs Trailer "Europe Around the World Tour"

After I saw the Europe Trailer for MSFS, I wanted to visit some of the places in the sim my self.
Also to check if the accusations are true, that the graphics are not as good in the sim as depicted in the trailers. I saw a lot of people here in the forum and reddit, doing these comparisons not even with the highest graphics settings, which I think is silly.

I have everything set to Ultra.
Ryzen 9 3900X
RTX 3090


In the trailer we can see sandbanks, seaweed and what not. In-game not so much.

Looks fine to me!

Also looks the same. My game even renders more trees in the background on the hills as is the case in the trailer.

Look at the trees in the trailer bottom right. The trees that I get in the game look better. More natural. Also the reflection on the river. More details in the reflection in the game than are in the trailer.

I cant see any difference in this one.

Also this looks identical to me.

Like in Faro, Portugal (first comparision) the water has nice details in the trailer, but not in-game.

So overall what I get presented in the trailers, I also get in-game. Except for some parts of water.
Cant say anything negative about the visual presentation. Looks different when it comes to broken aircrafts and avionics, which is a different story though.


The differences in water have been acknowledged by Asobo as an issue with the way water masking works. Essentially they need to go location by location to remove the water masking to allow the satellite imagery show through. They are doing that over time. In the last update a ton of places in the Caribbean were improved in that regard.


Nice comparison, I expected a rant post, but was pleasantly surprised! :slight_smile:


Yes, the thing with the water masks was mentioned. The team doing the trailers can tune on their own the depth of water.

The only thing that I really don‘t get: when they see that in a certain area it looks nice and they use it in the trailer, why don‘t they just push that change directly to the production? I mean what bad should happen?

I hope they get a little bit more agile in that sense over time…


But isn’t this because you’re comparing a recent video, probably made around 1.8.3, with the current version 1.9.3? What a lot of people are reporting in the forum is instead how it was better before, meaning during pre-release or at least and to some extent with the August 18 version.

You can find older official screenshot get-tagged around February 18, 2020 in the link below. You might want to compare with ultra settings on your system in some of these locations?

What beefy machine are you running? Any precaching or areas or is it all rolling cache/streaming data?

My system specs are stated at the top in my first post. And I dont have caching on, it is directly streamed from the internet (1 Gigabit).

I see. I wasnt aware of that situation. Well I took a lot of screenshots right after the initital release. So pre first patch. I can see if the game still looks as good as in those screenshots.

1 Like

Comparing a launch build to screenshots generated 9 months before the launch isn’t helpful. It’s common for games to have to reduce some graphical fidelity from the early alpha builds to make it more stable and improve performance, let alone make sure it can even run decently on a wide variety of systems.

On the contrary I believe it is very helpful because there are a lot of people complaining it was better before (during alpha) and these screenshots are showing it is not much different after all.

There are differences though which might be a subtle better LOD in the February 18 screenshot (looking at the Coit Tower area) and the water level which was revealing marinas back then at this specific location.

There is one glaring difference though you can’t see in a photo, which is how the photogrammetry outer LOD rings were fading-in view whereas they are now popping over the ground, whether it be bare ground (outermost ring where it is starting to appear) or over lowest LOD photogrammetry which was displayed already.

This makes any higher LOD tile displaying all of a sudden somehow, instead of unnoticeably being brought to view.

Autogen buildings on the other hand are still fading-in when first displaying at the outermost ring, but they are popping up atop the lower LOD version when you are closing in (like photogrammetry I’m describing above).


I suppose. I just ignore those folks because…it was an alpha.

1 Like

This all reflects my findings too. Slightly altered water is about the only change i could see in my post:

1 Like

Got it. missed it w/o my morning coffee. Thanks. Glad to know that it’s possible to achieve their videos with that system spec.

Given that your Ultra setting works differently than my Ultra setting is troubling. I’m not expecting to be able to run Ultra, yet the game allows me to and gives me 35 fps in California cities to boot. Seems like I don’t have the same opportunity to tune my system to the same Ultra setting.

Nice screen grabs and great post. Other than the bogus water that was already acknowledged by the developer, they look the same to me. In some places e.g. Barcelona, I even prefer how the mountains are rendered in your shot. Thanks for taking the time to do this and sharing.