This is not meant to be a criticism, but only a constructive contribution to this simulator, which at the moment is the best you can find.
Terrain textures have always been a critical point. After the latest updates I have noticed an effort of the developers to improve, but with final bad results.
In the past I worked for years on the orthophotos of my previous simulator, under the illusion that the originals could be improved with graphical changes. In the end, I realised that any modification leads to worse remedies than corrected defects. So in the end I found the courage to throw away terabites of textures and restore the originals.
I now see the same problem here. For example the textures in screen-shot 1 are very good and clearly unmodified. You can tell because the close screen-shot 2 shows the undeleted picture of the pylons on the ground. I still prefer this defect to the mess in screen- shot 3, which clearly shows a later intervention to mask other defects. Obviously you can see how unfortunate the choice of these orthophotos is: the images of the pylons on the ground show that these photos are not orthogonal at all. Imagine how images of house facades spoil the ground in cities.
Another texture change that I consider particularly damaging is the one recently made on certain waterways. In screen-shot 4 you can clearly see that after the bridge the river is replaced by a reconstruction from openmaps type sources. Clearly the resulting lacting strip, darker in the centre, is totally unrealistic when viewed from above.
I hope the developers realise that modifying original textures takes many hours of work with poor results. They can certainly spend their time better. It is the texture source that must improve by progressively substituting the old orthophotos by means of modern technologies.
I think you’re being too critical here, man. You wanna complain about global satellite data from 100 feet off the ground, go ahead, but this is like the people complaining about photogrammetry when they’re about to hit a building.
Most gamers have 3 or 6GB GTX1060’s, not 3090’s.
English isn’t my main language but I’d guess that nit-picky is the correct term to use here.
@SlowedMoss77560 have you seen the videos where Asobo explain how the orthos are analysed and edited?
Two things: I agree that when “updating” a data set, one should be sure it’s actually an update to something better.
-but-
the second thing: I’m not sure its the textures that changed. It could very well be but I see similar fields that look overly grainy and I think it may be the lighting changes that have been done. Those fields actually glow in the dark.
From the previous comments it seems to be understood the opposite of what I was suggesting, so I suppose it’s my English not working well.
In short I was suggesting to the developers not to waste time working on textures, because graphical editing often leads to uncertain results or even make them worse. The textures can be fine as they are, who cares if you see the picture of a pylon on the ground every now and then.
Regarding the worsening I see after the last updates: I notice extensive areas with unrealistic spots. It’s not a matter of nitpicking, they are distinguishable from great heights and even with a low-end pc.
Regarding the origin: the defects are easily recognizable to those who work in texture editing.
Even so… it is still a nit pick. It is a big big planet!! It is not a defect. Asobo should be commended for job well done.
I am waiting for people to start complaining that the streets need sweeping.
Asobo don’t have a large team of people that sit down and do this by hand.
What you see in MSFS is basically a digital twin of the entire planet. It’s built by sourcing an enormous amount of image data from a large set of different providers. Sometimes we have 3d models scanned by using real airplanes, sometimes it’s standard orthos taken from a plane, sometimes it’s crisp satellite imagery, sometimes it’s less good satellite imagery.
All of these are taken from different heights using different hardware at different time and dates during the year.
For that reason the raw data don’t look the same so it’s edited to make colours and contrast more consistent all over the planet. This job is way to big for any human to do by hand, this is where Blackshark AI enter the game and use their AI to normalize the imagery you see in the sim.
Not doing this would make the world look much more inconsistent. The result you have now is impressive, not poor.
I’d recommend you to look in to the following videos to learn a little bit more about how the world in MSFS is constructed.
Thank you very much for your reply.
I’ve watched the videos and they are impressive, I think especially for new younger users, that openness to X-Box will definitely increase.
I’m excited about this simulator, I bought it on pre-order just because of the fact that Microsoft after years decided to get back into this business.
But during these years of MS’s absence great progress has been made. For some years now experienced XP users have had free tools to replace the default terrain textures with data available from various providers, and on the internet you can find sites where the community lists the best available orthophotos for each country and ranks them according to defects (orthogonality, % clouds, etc). Automatic texture postprocessing and source selection based on coordinates are supported by free tools.
Of course, we have to take into account that data providers only tolerate private users, so I certainly don’t expect the same results from MSFS, which can only focus on postprocessing of the available textures or wait for better ones. By the way, here I was referring to this kind of postprocessing, I know that by hand at most you can remove some clouds.
I just wanted to point out that the postprocessing I’ve encountered recently hasn’t satisfied me, because even though it improves quality, it makes the environment look artificial.
I think the developers deserve the best compliments for what they have achieved so far, but they also want to hear critical comments. Compliments are nice, but they don’t help in taking the right direction.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.