This is the sound advice we get from our Mod team when we come to the public forums to express our disappointments or dissatisfaction?
Just had a flight around Zermatt. The shadows and underexposed satellite imagery is way out of place. This area has again been completely ruined by another “free” WU.
Wow. What a professional and reasonable response from our mod team! Thanks! 
The Mountain Slope in Zermatt with the POIs Riffelsee, Gornergratsee, Gornergrat South Observatory, and Stockhorn, is particularly bad. The underexposed satellite imagery is dark and detail less. The mountains next to this slope are the same and bleed into the town of Zermatt. This area used to be a vibrant mountain side with trails, ski slopes, the train rails, colorful grass and trees, clearly could see rocks and texture. Now it’s dark and blurry. With a dark satellite image edge right through the Gorner Glacier…
It’s not that I’m being picky. Or “don’t like it” it’s the fact that yet again this area was fine, and now it needs to be reworked AGAIN. Can one WU come without a hitch ever? This should have been caught before release, there’s really no excuse. Honestly, saying ‘don’t like it don’t download it’ isn’t a great acumen to have toward your customers when trying to point out the obvious.
Yikes, that’s horrible! 
The new “better” data is such a downgrade 
Switzerland definitelly got a massive downgrade.
I hope we will get an answer to this in the September Live Q&A.
“Enjoy” the following examples.
Again, it can’t be said enough times: They COULD use FREE (!!), AWESOME data from the Swiss Government that it is miles better than what they used now to downgrade huge areas of Switzerland.
Instead the used very poor new Bing maps and sell them to us as “new and better aerials” (as Jörg Neumann said several times in the last few weeks.)
The new Bing data has (not everywhere, but very large areas) a very ugly yellow-ish tint, is not very sharp, often causes mountains in shadow to not have any detail at all anymore.
It’s simple: It’s a downgrade and could be so much better if they would use the official, free (commercially usable) Swiss data.
Overall: Very sad. So many areas look worse (not everything of course, but way too much to be ignored). And it’s especially sad because much much better data would just be out there, ready for them to be used.
I hope they will adress these issiues quickly and explain in the September Q&A how they intend to fix this.
The thing is the new „better“ orthos are unfortunately NOT optional - they are installed server side and get streamed regardless of your installed WU - otherwise it would mean that MS needs to hold a version of the world for each WU - I highly doubt that …
so i fire up the sim now,deinstall the wu,and try if it is true wat @Hester40MT say,if not i can reinstall this 
please hester don‘t do that. take the feedback seriously and don‘t write stuff like that. we do not have a choice regarding aerials and DEM as these are server based and have nothing to do with WU! we can not go back to what we had previously even if we wanted to. and please keep in mind that we invest our time to point to possible problems because we love the sim and this particular region.
look like i miss only the good new stuff after uninstall,
mountains as in pics from other is the same mess,so uninstall does not fix it 
also i do not want to waste my time,i want fly,so look in a other direktion now,if something is to bad…
so install it and must live with
it does not fix it for me,install again and do not mess up more. there were also other updates,so it look like it miss something when i uninstall only the wu
Folks,
Please keep this thread on-topic with feedback about World Update XVIII. Do not derail this topic with posts discussing forum moderation.
As a reminder, the forum mods are volunteers from the community, not employees of the MSFS Team. Their role is to handle flags submitted my other posters, help keep the forum organized by moving errant posts to the right sub-category, and ensure all site members follow the Code of Conduct.
Thanks,
MSFS Team
As I mentioned above, the moderators are volunteers from the community, not members of the MSFS Team. You may treat their comments and suggestions about the World Update as personal opinions, no different than if they had come from any other member of this forum.
If you have constructive criticism or feedback about the World Update, please post it in this thread.
Thanks,
MSFS Team
That’s normally a line I would write. And I agree with the sentiment.
Unfortunately some WUs and CUs had some really bad issues making several parts of the world worse instead of better. Especially the colour matching of the PG areas has been extremely hit or miss since the beginning. Take the Munich PG which has been included since the beginning: it has totally different colours compared to the surrounding area, and the updated Bing maps also have some really terrible hickups that weren’t there before. That’s a total immersion killer and I find it pretty annoying.
Don’t misunderstand me here: I love the new POIs and content. But if some of the content is worse than what I can get from flightsim.to, or if it breaks something that was really good before, that’s frustrating as heck.
I know it’s free and I appreciate the work Gaya and all the others do. But even a free update should work properly. Noone would complain if they left out some POIs or PG areas that aren’t up to snuff yet.
Better leave stuff out than release stuff that’s subpar and never gets fixed.
I just spent some time cruising around DE in WU18 and was revisiting some old bugs.
At least in the place that I looked at in DE those issues are now gone. It feels like all zoom levels have been derived from the same base sat image data. Nice.
However, in a different place in this thread people are reporting that this is not the case for CH.
I was hoping that the new MSFS 2024 texture creation process was somehow modified (deriving lower zoom from higher zoom images). But now it feels like DE just got lucky.
Due to different sat images those “tree problems” seem to have been reduced but the underlaying problem seems to be still there. E.g. in the regions around Würzburg one can clearly see that the AI code still cannot correctly detect trees in regions where the sat images either have trees without leaves (e.g. autumn sat data) or the sat images where take at a somewhat problematic angle.
Here is one example north of Würzburg looking towards Würzburg where the forrest looks like it is made out of “lines” (the tree trunks) … and that does not translate to sim trees.
This issues seems basically unchanged. Here is a related picture from the same site from WU18:
I fully understand that such “AI detection stuff” is way harder then most people think. So I am not sure if there is an easy fix … or if MSFS 2024 is using different 3D objects on top of the shared texture-landscape.
I hope that some of this is useful to someone.
also look at this,even the forced update did mess up other,so uninstall or not install is no sulution
even for Free ???
in Germany we say Geschenkt noch zu Teuer
(given as a gift, still too expensive)
and the forced update at simstart you can not deinstall…
so this is no solution,
Thank You
After the “improved” WU scenery in DACH region I discovered that, at least in Bing maps, there were some very annoying brownish slabs in shadowy areas. The Bing images were taken in the morning, it seems, so that there are shadows along forests on their east sides, which MSFS shows in brown instead of black. Satellite images with shadows should not even be made for maps. Like AnkH I am disappointed. It looked around Switz. and Germany. Here’s some screenprints.
why do we need to see interiors of airports? I think flight-simming is about realistic flying, which is done inside the cockpit.
With some airports you can see the interiors of buildings very easily.
hab ich auch eben gedacht. Irgendwie schnoddrig und frech.
[Moderator Edit: Internet translation:
That’s what I just thought. Somehow brash and cheeky.]
