Great to hear. Am personally running 32GB of a rolling cache as it seems to help on subsequent flights (but reset it after every update). Also, have you tried with a hardwired connection to further reduce latency? I have 1gbps up/down, but wired was the only way to keep latency in the 3-4ms range.
Do you have another mesh terrain (customized height profiles) in the community folder? Like ItalyDEM or AustriaDEM? These kill the Photogrammetry of Vienna and Graz.
1 Like
I had the same problem with bad PG in some cities. But my home town Brunswik Germany looks pretty amazig as PG.
Here are some pictures from the city:
edit: LOD is on 6 in usercfg and precache is on ultra
3 Likes
From what I remember reading, the data is from Bing but not necessarily whatâs on Bing maps currently. Asobo gets the raw data and processes it further to make it much easier to download and this is not some continual process. In other words, a FS city might contain Bing data from a year ago, the last time Asobo did that conversion for their servers. There are areas that I fly over near my home that have had massive construction that does not show up on the MSFS scene but I can go into Bing maps and the view is much more current. Notice each new release that you also get updates on other areas besides the featured ones. Bottom line is it will just get better and better over time.
I have a hardwired connection (meaning, no Wifi, if thatâs what you mean, according to Windowsâs âxbox networkâ, the latency is 171 ms (downloading stuff right now, donât think itâs important though.
Anyway, a conclusion for me: this last 20 minutes : went to Vienna, good textures took way too long too load, but got there eventually. Went to Berlin, everything or almost was fine from the get go. Went to Paris, good textures took a little while too load, much less than Vienna.
If thereâs a explanation behind all this, itâs Osobo"s responsibility, not mine. No âwork aroundâ, no resetting everything, an EXPLANATION WHY. And possibly a real fix down the road ?
2 Likes
hmm 171 ms seems quite high (40 or below should be what to aim for if youâre hardwired, so maybe something to explore further there). For comparison, in xbox networking mine is reads 9ms and speedtest.net shows 4ms.
I do agree that some areas resolve photogrammetry better - just did the Berlin discovery flight and youâre right - the resolution and geometry does seem better and resolves faster; the geometry of the buildings also seems different from those sampled in Vienna.
Berlin:
Vienna:
Itâs not a data streaming problem.
Fly over Vienna below 2k feet, use active pause and wait for 5 mins so youâre sure the PG really is 100% loaded and looks itâs best. Itâs still looks really bad
I dont know for sure what it is, but itâs not likely to be individual users because individual users have very different experiences with different PG cities. I usually take off from my home town of Columbus, Ohio, USA. Itâs a trivial place of little importance compared to Wien, Austria, but it is a PG city. It shows me nothing whatsoever like the horrible degradation in Wien, where the buildings are melted, the city landmarks that arenât handcrafted POIs are often misshapen blobs, and the streets and highways are barely recognizable as such. In Columbus, everything in the PG part of the metro area is simply phototealistic, essentially perfect.
My setup is R7 5800X, 32 GB 3600 RAM, RTX 3080, PCI3 M.2 SSD, and 200Mbs internet. Vienna is atrocious, North American PG cities are practically perfect.
Thatâs oddâŠI have magnificent scenery of Vienna (default after WU6)
Yeah, but that has nothing to do with the PG quality of Vienna itself: there is clearly a streaming issue, and I think that there is even a bug thread about this already. So yes, Asobo / MS is aware of this streaming issue.
But again, the PG mesh / texture quality of Vienna is fine (for those of us where the streaming works flawlessly, like me).
1 Like
If itâs magnificent, please show us a screenshot or two from 1,000 feet. I, too, thought that I was seeing better PG in Wien than some of the photos on this thread, but when I paused and looked closely, I was shocked at how horrible the details are.
1 Like
Again, you clearly seem to experience a streaming issue. As some others apparently do experience as well.
For others like me it seems to work, I get the expected PG quality. See my screenshot provided above (with the F-14 - canât miss it ;))
I guess you misread my post. My point was that itâs not a result of differences in individual user setups but rather a system problem just as you assert.
Huh? I misread your post byâŠ
⊠confirming exactly what you said? You gotta help me with that argumentation 
Yes, there is an issue with the streaming of the PG. But the quality of the PG mesh / textures itself is fine (once fully downloaded).
This is funny because your photo with the F-14 clearly shows exactly the same garbage as others are seeing and disproves your own point. Look closely, and you (or anyone) can see the same badly âmeltedâ buildings everyone else does. At first glance it can look fairly good, but fly lower or simply zoom in on the photo you posted, and itâs terrible, yucky photogrammetric rendering.
Ah, an âexpectation problemâ then⊠problem solved, Iâd say.
ok, i agree that PG in vienna is super, but not everybody is able to download it because of what ever. thats not satisfying for me and i challenge Asobo to fix this
1 Like
This sucked candy stick is the representation of the âDonauturmâ. its the most important object for VR in Vienna. Iâm not able to get it more detailed, even if i hit pause and wait a few minutes.
And this is, how it looks in real life
3 Likes
I started to do some other tests. The 171 ms was the one I got inside Windows settings âxbox networkâ. An other one browser based said latency " not loaded" 20 ms, loaded 108 ms. The other one was made with the application âspeedtestâ, it only mentions a Ping number of 11 ms. Otherwise I always get around 45 mbps descendant.