I was assuming that photogrammetry would especially well capture bigger facilities like airports, whereas residentials would rely on blackshark’s AI engine. For some reason Asobo decided to provide default airports in a Lego-Style build instead of photogrammetry.
Being suspicious enough that this was done to create an add-on market i have to express my deepest disappointment about a strategy where letting users wait for payware airports has priority over providing a ready to go solution. I would have prefered getting the pg-airports over lego and still be able to purchase detailed add-ons if required. The Lego-Airports do in no way represent the local feeling. They all look the same, and i have no clue whether i land in south carolina or alaska.
my request is to unleash the photogrammetry airports on users’ demand and send the lego ports to minecraft.
i think the problem with photogrammetry airport is that you have to remove everything non building on an airport.
You have on the Model all planes, cars, containers, people …
photogrammetry would probably show docked planes and carts standing around,
that is what you are saying. so one would need to pick an empty dock.
Yes, i agree, but i’d give it a preference over lego-airports. your photo shows, these may not be perfect but still look good enough to be authentic rather than lego. All the lego-work cost Asobo months and months of manual work, which they could have invested into something smarter.
Thinking of the fact that they release shipyards with ships and cranes as photogrammetric output, far far away from perfect, even melting. And bridges at low quality with solid underdecks. So why not letting us the airports, at least as an option.
For the sake of add-on publishers so these can sell their stuff to us? i will buy add-ons for a small number of places if i really need to, but still prefer having photogram as basis or at least as an option.
my request is about having the option for those who prefer. for the reason of authenticity.
let users remove things or edit or add was done in the past and promotes an eco-system of creative artists contributing their stuff to the community. Every user has his/her prefered place, so as seen from the marketing aspect that would have been the right decision. deliver a tool or not, users will fiddle out how to edit.
Those who prefer lego, let them lego.
please asobo/microsoft, please let us have photogram airports, reverse your strategy.
thank you.
Totally agree. The impact on loading time of installing the free Paederborn Airport suggests the sim will be virtually unusable if I purchase and install all the airports I fly to. My home Airport (Bristol, UK) is utter rubbish compared to the add on I had in FSX. Even definition of buildings is far worse. Grass trees and runways are the only improvements. Once you take off it’s a different story of course, but we still spend plenty of time on the ground working through checklists etc.
And another thing: no airliners ever visit, all parking spaces are incorrectly labelled “small” and consequently not ground services available for airliners.
So I imported YVR from Google to what it look like in the sim and it didn’t look bad until you got up close. The biggest issue is textures and overall 3D render of the buildings.
Some buildings look melted because it’s not rendering properly and so far I can’t figure out how to fix this issue. You can technically add high res textures to the 3D model but the Google 3D models are not prefect and will look weird. Removing ground items is easy but it takes time.
Speak for yourself. It’s what YOU want, not necessarily what WE want.
And I agree with some of the comments here that photogrammetry scenery is often not good enough when you get close. And that’s the difference: when you fly over a photogrammetry city you usually keep a certain distance of at least 100m and even getting closer you are at least doing 50kn. So you can’t see most imperfections.
Sitting at the gate you see immediately that many lines are not straight, the textures are whacky and most things look a little bit - well blurred. Just look at the picture paulanergraz posted. Even from this distance the buildings and gangways look blurry. So why do it?
I don’t know what you expected. That all airports in FS2020 looked picture perfect? My home airport looks rather ok even though it is auto gen. All the buildings are in the right place and about the right height. The gangways are there and move etc. It’s not as good as the addon I used to have, but still it is a decent large airport. But yeah: there are some autogen airports that are fairly awful. But honestly: do you really plan to fly to 20.000 different airports?
But that’s what we have a large community for: just look at sites like flightsim.to and the tremendous amout of stuff it has turned out in only a month! Most of it good quality too. You will also notice that NOT ONE developer has chosen to do a photogrammetry airport, while photogrammetry city scapes and landmarks are abundant.
As stated before: using photogrammetry to do airports will not only look like sh** it most likely would be more work for the devs than creating new ones.
sticking to my request.
which, if you read it a bit more carefully is asking for the option of having the pg-version,
and let the users do the updating.
reading some of your text, not sure if you got the point.
@paulanergraz would you like to post a side by side screenshot of your pictured airport with the fs lego-variant, same perspective? i am curious to see the difference.
Absolutely. It’s ridiculous having a completely 3D photogrammetry area and leaving the airport as lego ones. If at least those were well made, nice. But default lego airports are far from good quality, and realistic details.
Do you realize how much does it to tak to model an airport ? No wonder why devs are charging for it real money and you want all of that for free ? or what exactly is your request here ?
How did you assume that airports should be better than this ? This originates from source data, it is how it is. Try in 2030 if its any better
request was to have photogrammetric airports as an option for those who prefer them over LEGO.
and
your nasa spaceship you can download for free, link attached.
Are you aware that you just downloaded a scenery for free? Do you realize how much does it to tak to model dat nasa spacepot ? No wonde nobody reads you and you took it all fo free?
Photogrammetry airports would look like garbage. Not to mention all of the parked aircraft and vehicles (represented as polygon blobs) all over the place, obstructing any navigation through the scenery.
Maybe your assumptions would have been more accurate had you watched all of the preview videos and developer interviews.
If you want a visually accurate airport, you are going to need to install freeware or a premium addon. It may not be what you want, but that’s the reality.
crosscheck your assumptions with the actual photogrammetric results against the actual request. thanks. you still can your own oppinion and chose LEGO.
I am not assuming anything. I did mention your incorrect assumption, if that’s what you are referring to.
The only screenshot I see is exactly what I described - a low-poly airport with parked blobs, obstructing the parking areas. I can’t imagine how bad that would look up close.
If this i what you want, I am not going to try to change your mind. In my opinion, it’s not usable, unless you plan to simply fly over it from 2000ft.
Well to be honest the smaller int. airports I did fly to, were better then anything provided by known sims so far! I do fly a lot on business to LRTR (Romania) and I know the airport by heart. It was the first time in my simming history that I flew to LRTR and recognized the place.
Another well known SIM advertized with over 30.000 reworked stock airports IIRC and flying to that particullar airport turned out to be a desaster. Even the stock buildings that where there in v4 are gone in v5.
And I checked out e.g. EDNY and EDJA in germany south or LSZR in switzerland and was amazed how good they look.
I think that some expectation might be a bit high for a sim of this price point.
Yes, i am asking for it as an option. an o-p-t-i-o-n. You can still fly LEGO.
funny thing that conspiracy thing, i agree. Saw some actual papers floating around devs begging ms hard for establishing that add-on market. obviously being scared they’d go out of business. But the real reason may have finally come from an even different corner. Compare: X-plane 's Gateway strategy. We’ll never know.
