I imagined that MSFS would have been vanilla, not OrbX version. So MSFS OrbX do nothing about meshes around airport? I have that Innsbruck in my X-Plane. Would you recommend it to FS too? What it adds?
I certainly think X-Plane has a future if they partner with Google to use Google Earth. Has anyone here used Google Earth Pro on PC and entered the flight simulator mode in Google Earth?? If so you will see that the 3D buildings are much more true to life given that Google probably uses a combination of flat satnav images blended with Google Street view to build true to life building modelsā¦ If X-Plane can exploit this then it will be able to build an amazingly realistic next generation infrastructure. A positive partnership for X-Plane Googleā¦ And fans of flight simmingā¦
1 Like
Sure,
All taken from same height ~ 30k, clear skies, etc.
Both sims on ultra settings and photosceneries (fs deafult and orbx TE GB) (over EGGD)
XP:
MSFS:
I could also not zoom further with MSFS, so some are taken from wider angle there - anyway, you can clearly see what I mean. No autogen in MSFS above certain height over terrain + blurriness. Either it is something on my end (post your screens) or this is core issue that needs to be addressed.
6 Likes
Are you serious ??
Satellite image based sceneries comes with tons of issues that are not going well on independent desktop sims, especially these pro stations they successfully target. One is that they would require constant fast internet connection and reliable high speed servers on the other side (costs that could only be afforded by giant like MS) and that is also only possible because they control the whole technology involved, starting from raw satellite image, trough post processing and azure cloud infrastructure. No other company has at the same time this kind of blend of gaming dev skills and infrastructure capabilities. Therefore, when āstarsā aligned they decided to monetize it in a form of next gen sim.
This however is totally different with Laminar team, they will never be able to compete there and therefore not even trying, these guys are after living and dynamic but plausible env that resembles the real one in form of things like streets layouts (it is based on open maps), buildings placements, their shape and height, placement of vegetation etc based on real but not photo data. They believe that satellite images are dead by nature and represent only one moment frozen in time, which is exactly the opposite of what their goal is. And with help of AI it can be really interesting what they will come up in what possibly will be XP12 technology. Austin confirmed that they have outsourced dedicated team for their next gen (nomen omen) auto gen scenery.
Although, if they had powers that MS has, probably they would go easy way anyway 
That is a fair point. Money does not stink as they say.
So again, to avoid any stutter in my line of thought - these are fundamentally different products, although used in a similar manner by average user.
1 Like
It was in an interview with him on YouTube. I heard it from his mouth. Would you like me to dig out the link? Everything Iāve said I can be backed up with evidence. (Refreshing change isnāt it?!? 
)
I found another interesting infographic recently that X-Plane themselves released stating that since 10.40 onwards, 50% of users actually still fly with a mouse. (That actually shocked meā¦) That means, as a MINIMUM, at least 50% of their user base (excluding demos) is still your average Jo, unless you think the pros are teaching their students with a mouse? 
Then itās reasonable to assume that a percentage of those using a Joystick and/or Yoke are mainstream as well, (like me,) so we can safely claim that at least over 50% of their users are normal mainstream users having a bit of fun.
This thread seems to be full of people trying to make themselves feel a bit more special than they should, with a view that their sim is some how really meant for the pro but they can use it as well.
As I said originally, there is no difference between all three products when it comes to the market theyāre after. (Original point I made when someone tried to draw a distinct difference between all three and their ādifferentā markets) And theyād fall flat on their backside if it wasnāt for the mainstream users using it as a normal everyday sim. Same group of people (I own P3D, X-Plane and MSFS) using it for the same reason. None of them would give up their ābonusā mainstream users, that is their main market.
That is a fair and true point for MSFS. No mainstream, no money, simple as that.
P3D? - hmm, that is kind of interesting, they for sure have lot of big simulator companies for long term clients and they probably consume it extensively for their own needs as a aerotech business runners. They are really big however, and probably the team is also quite significant. With some cost optimizations they would probably survive as a platform without mainstream.
XP? These, at the absolute core are really just 5-7 people including Austin. Some 3rd party devs are bigger than that. Sure, it would be huge hit for them, both to their wallet and for reputation, but mobile/pro sales would run most probably.
This is all speculation after all. I;m just happy we have a choice and donāt see titles go but new come up 
FSW was really sad moment. No matter if liked it or not.
Otherwise I would be left with blurred ground at 30k in bugged Airbus toy 
Thanks, very helpful. I see what you mean. I hadnāt noticed this because Iāve never had occasion to fly that high and zoom in on the ground. Thatās maybe where I would disagree with youur ācore issue that needs to be addressedā. Whilst I agree the effect is there, Iām not sure how much of an impact it really has in real gameplay?
I;ve done some experimentation, and found the ācut offā is 20,000ft. At that altitude, using the drone camera on max zoom, I can still see autogen scenery. Above that, I donāt. I assume you are using the drone camera zoom in your shots too?
Some comparisons:
20,000ft not zoomed:
20,000ft max zoom with the drone camera
21,000ft no zoom
21,000ft max zoom with the drone camera
Iām not going to fire up xplane to compare as it is too difficult and Iāve not paid for True Earth, which isnāt cheap. So thatās a point to consider - we have base game with scenery across the entire world v mature game with add ons covering small area (and I just checked, True Earth for Great Britain (South) is Ā£32 ish. So you are paying a third-ish of the price for the whole of FS2020 to get a third of the UK done in high fidelity.
Just for fun: True Earth for Britain South covers 42,000 square miles - or 1,312 square miles per Ā£. The entire world has a surface area of 167 million square miles, 29% is land, so thatās 48.43 million square miles. So if Orbx True Earthed all the land, that might cost Ā£36,844. Just a bit of fun.
So Iām really not sure you can reasonably argue that not having autogen visible above 20,000ft is really a core issue.
1 Like
Well it is not āblocker thingā like installation issues that they need to address first. That is for sure. But when you do these 3-4hr flights sometimes and it REALLY gets boring out there (it also does in real life, trust me) the only thing left to do is to look for cool thing outside. And I developed a habit of taking binoculars to real aircraft so you can zoom a bit, also it simply looks amazing with a depth of field that you get from high above. Same thing I do on XP, when there is something to look at of course like high res photoscenery, landmarks, etc.
I just was very exited to try this in MSFS, as finally we have photoscenery globally, so I could zoom in like with a binocular, watch sandy coastlines, some individual building, cars, etc.
Right now it is not possible, soā¦ a bit disappointment for a true next gen and all promises. feels almost like you have a pack of your favorite candies in hands but cannot open it, only some smell of it
Cost wise, I would not get so exited either, because before You know it, you will start buying 3rd party airports on avarage of 15-20usd that will still put our p3d/xp multi hundred dollar bills in same price tag sooner or later. The way I see is that we finally got some decent photoreal base to work on, but donāt let yourself get fooled into thinking that you will spend less on MSFS than on previous sim 
Come on! Iām already pre-ordered on pmdg 
2 Likes
Is there an xplane + all the trimmings equivalent of this for comparison?
Thatās fair
I bought my ORBX UK South and Central in their Xmas sale, Ā£30.00 for both of them (Ā£15.00 per version) and I own those now. As much as you get out of the box, or rather out of the servers from FS, I would still buy higher definition scenery for the UK that rectifies the issues with the scenery MS are streaming to me. With the exception of the two photrogammetery cities, the rest would be adequate if I didnāt know the country but is lacking because I do.
For a lot of people, including myself, in msfs at high altitudes the scenery is just a flat blurry mess. We have no idea why. Our settings are cranked to maximum in many cases. Offline caching even made no difference when I tried it.
1 Like
I think that making very detailed and locally correct scenery based on flat satellite images is beyond either MS or any other company, even google, not for now at least. True Earth products are hand crafted to a large degree, it is so much more than just photoscenery with auto gen - there are thousands of custom made objects, not to mention custom mesh - castles, bridges, masts, landmarks in general. They are super well mixed into autogen. For MSFS I see only 2 directions that can achieve similar quality:
- They leave it as is and leave it up to 3rd party, eventually maybe updating base photoscenery from time to time with simply newer data or higher res, better color matched etc
- They (but that depends on more than just FS team obviously) add a lot more photogrametry coverage and improve mechanism behind rendering these from altitude.
Otherwise, ORBX and others will not miss a chance to flood market with localized scenery packs like they used to do for other sims, and like they did with London already for MSFS.
A third solution would be for BlackShark to refine their AI so that it makes a better job of recognising building types. You mention Orbx custom made objects, true to some degree but look at the churches, its at best a handful of stone church style buildings used over and over again in towns throughout the uk, not accurate really but close enough. I donāt see why BS AI couldnāt use the exact same process they use now to create churches, stone farm buildings and even larger Georgian country buildings to some degree. Castles are another missing building type and this from an Austrian company based in a country where castles are rife.
*stumbles in 36 hours later with the thread reaching 420 posts nowā¦
And another 100 posts of subjective positions, outlining individuality of likes and dislikes. I wonder what would have already achieved if all the energy would have put into something constructive - May be cleaning up the house or roomā¦ Or organising the HD directory with the favorite bikini beauties pictures according to hair colourā¦ or maybe even something more profane - helping the newcomers here with their beginners questions.
I hope the poor forum admin reading this here is still alive and mentally healthy. chuckles
1 Like
Gordon, Thank you for your input, I have deleted my previous post and have learnt a bit more about this great simulator. I now have full world satellite scenery. As it is new, it takes a little time to get round to knowing more about it. As with missing airports - you start of with āwowā having a dig at me, I take it? I am happy to wait for updates to fly to other destinations. So I very much doubt that I will be leaving Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020. Some of us are slower at learning than others. You also have to accept, that flight simulation is also about flying using the instruments otherwise it wouldnāt be a flight simulator! Absolutely, the guys at Asobo are great and have achieved a brilliant simulator, there is no doubt about it. Your feedback is irrelevant to this topic. I would suggest that before you post, like myself, think about the consequences as things will change in due course. Happy flying!
I am, IMO like most x-plane users, well aware of that YT video. Is was in fact also already mentioned on this forum and also linked on the x-plane forum. I did in fact in that respect also suggest that people should read the comments made by x-plane users. I found some of the comments very enlightening. But please link it here again if you want. If you read your post again, you will see that you did not say 'I heardā¦:: or use the IMO - which why you were asked to elaborate or provide the evidence. The video is however no evidence that proves what you or Austin stated is a fact - so I do not see a refreshing change 
I concede that it may be a basis for an opinion of an average Jo lacking facts but I do not believe that a Business Analyst would rely on a public comment made by a company owner faced with massive competition - which is (as I think you saying) is aimed at LRās main customer base. Any public statements by MS to that effect would also be worth linking IMO
LRās annual accounts showing a break down of sales would probably be evidence. Austinās interview statement might have been an off the cuff defensive answer to an unwanted unexpected question. There is IMO no reason to believe that a company owner would broadcast the truth about a worsening in the sales or financial situation of his company. There have certainly been many cases where the workforce has been taken completely surprised by the insolvency announcement of their company.
BTW I love the friendly and polite discussion we can have on this forum
Please link that if you think it is on-topic and provides evidence for the correctness of your opinion.
Please elaborate and name the posters you are referring to so that they comment and expand on their opinion if they wish. That seems fair.
I canāt see what you are trying to say with these opinions of yours. Could you please elaborate and also try to provide evidence - as a refreshing change 
Are saying that the gamer market is and always has been the main market of LR. I am asking because I cannot see any modern gaming elements feature in XP11. I am also somewhat confused in that respect because LR does not offer a forum aimed at gamers and because the XP manual still contains a quote by Austin āX-plane is an engineering tool and not a gameā. If you think it is on-topic we could then discuss whether or not LR has completely neglected it gamers market.
Thank you for indulgence and allowing to me question the correctness of you opinions which you felt necessary to voice here.
Exactly, i have the same blurry mess with MSFS compared to XP. Actually the clouds, weather in general (except the fact that Live weather is broken) and lightings look absolutely great, otherweise i would not see a single advantage of using MSFS for flights above FL150. They really should improve these blurry textures.
Iām sorry if my language is inappropriateā¦ I donāt care which is better, XP11 or MSFS2020, I have both, in XP I use 3 monitors for VFR and a fourth, touch one, for IFR, I donāt use the mouse a lot, because I have all control needed for GA flight, what for the moment is partial impossibleā¦ but I read a lot of people arguing that MSFS is astonishingā¦ OK, I see very nice scenery, but away from the reality and what was advertised by MS, I said this several times, Douro river, Porto , Portugal, is runing up hill all the time, where I live my building 13 floors is a 3 floors warehouse!!! so, Iām very upset with the game, because I bought it for IFR flight and I cannāt get anything similar to what was advertisedā¦ in my area creeks are rivers??? Theres tree every where, the devs need to let us reduce the trees using a sliderā¦ On the shores of douro river more or less 20 miles away from the sea the trees and roads are gone!!! is a game with all this flaws, astonishing???
2 Likes