Wow. I love how the cities don't look the same. There is real variety there and the night lighting in the cities is the best I have ever seen regardless of the simulator used or add on used. Amazing.

Indeed it looks very good.

Looks nice but I suspect when we start going over  less picturebook cities of the kind which aren't popular tourist destinations for city breaks, things will be a bit less accurate. Even so, it's certainly an improvement on how any other flight sim appears straight out of the box.

If the available data allows for it. That's the good news for the add-on developers. They will be all in business for a long time

Alan, you beat me for the response. 

Edited August 3, 20205 yr by hjsmuc

It does look good in most places, but it also shows some shortcomings. In Skiathos it's clear to see Bing is outdated.  In real life the Tarmac has been expanded to more than twice of the size in the video. The runway is so curvy that when ie. an Airbus is landing on rw 02, they can't see the other end of the rw. On the approch to rw 02 there's a very significant windmill landmark, and houses in Skiathos are not terracota coulored, but white, This is not a critique of the sim, just saying there's clearly room for improvement from third party developers.

46 minutes ago, GSalden said:

Indeed it looks very good.

I thought you was not interested in MSFS, changing your mind Gerard? 😛

Its not just the scenery, its the weather the lighting .....it goes on and on....and its DX11 so no VRAM oom's, v5 with the auto gen your showing in your video, in v5 you properly would not even load the sim before you VRAM oom.

BTW it looks far better than TE and the night lighting is WOW.

Edited August 3, 20205 yr by Nyxx

15 minutes ago, hjsmuc said:

If the available data allows for it. That's the good news for the add-on developers. They will be all in business for a long time

Alan, you beat me for the response. 

I'm assuming the same thing will occur which did for previous simulator sceneries to some extent, which is that it depends on what country you are in as to how feasible that is in terms of cost.

That's one of the reasons why there's a lot of accurate US scenery. In the US, any not-security-sensitive data gathered by any Government organisation is regarded as in the public domain, since the US public's taxes funded it, whereas many other country's Governments don't take quite such an egalitarian and philanthropic view even though the same is true for them, so scenery developers have to pay for the mesh data and the terrain imagery in those places.

55 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

I thought you was not interested in MSFS, changing your mind Gerard? 😛

Its not just the scenery, its the weather the lighting .....it goes on and on....and its DX11 so no VRAM oom's, v5 with the auto gen your showing in your video, in v5 you properly would not even load the sim before you VRAM oom.

BTW it looks far better than TE and the night lighting is WOW.

David, here I have a full-size 737-800 P3Dv5 cockpit with multiple view pc’s that use Wideview for outside view syncing, PSXT + RT for AI aircraft syncing and FSGRW for weather syncing.

Everything is working great together now.

It might take a while when I can have everything using MSFS.

 

 

I don't know if it is possible to land on it, but in the fly over Milan, at 13:08, it is also implemented an helipad (the green circle on the right). 

DIsclaimer - I'm massively excited about this sim.

But London looks terrible (I'm not just talking about the ObsidianAnt video). And there's no photogrammetry for the UK, apart from two not-very-attractive cities on the south coast. It is really bad - significantly sub XP, or FSX default. What I'm hoping is that the lack of attention to detail here is because there's bing photogrammetry coming for the area & therefore it is seen as a waste of effort. As far as I can tell, they haven't added a new photogrammetry area since 2014, though (please correct me if I'm wrong here).

Things like the correct skyscraper profile for Canary Wharf (critical for the ILS approach into London City). Or Buckingham Palace rendered as an office block. I appreciate that there are plenty of worldwide cities which have a similar absence of detail - but I'd assumed that an iconic city would have a little more detail. Not just that I can't fly over my house - but the Queen can't fly over her house. No St Paul's Cathedral. No Gherkin.

Well...maybe it doesn't matter. The sim is about flying to places I don't know, rather than places I do. It is slightly painful to see Barcelona, or Naples looking fantastic vs a set of generic boxes - I will hope for updates and in the meantime spend my time in Barcelona, Naples. Or, apparently, Renton.

 

 

38 minutes ago, Nate1 said:

DIsclaimer - I'm massively excited about this sim.

But London looks terrible (I'm not just talking about the ObsidianAnt video). And there's no photogrammetry for the UK, apart from two not-very-attractive cities on the south coast. It is really bad - significantly sub XP, or FSX default. What I'm hoping is that the lack of attention to detail here is because there's bing photogrammetry coming for the area & therefore it is seen as a waste of effort. As far as I can tell, they haven't added a new photogrammetry area since 2014, though (please correct me if I'm wrong here).

No doubt, London isn't the best advertising for MSFS. The good news is, there are a whole lot prominent and less prominent places with better rendition. I am pretty sure, an addon-maker (got an idea?), if not Asobo, will help with London soon after release. 

And of course none of us and not even the YouTubers know what we will really get on August, 18.

Kind regards, Michael

40 minutes ago, pmb said:

No doubt, London isn't the best advertising for MSFS. The good news is, there are a whole lot prominent and less prominent places with better rendition. I am pretty sure, an addon-maker (got an idea?), if not Asobo, will help with London soon after release. 

And of course none of us and not even the YouTubers know what we will really get on August, 18.

Kind regards, Michael

Thank you Michael.

I'm incredibly excited to go off exploring in the new sim. And truth be told, I'm most interested in the flight model, navigation, systems, and so on. There's a part of me that wants my home city rendered beautifully, but - as Asobo say - the world is huge.

Looking forward to both August the 18th and also what clever people (like ORBX) in the community will develop on this platform.

8 hours ago, GSalden said:

 

Still think N.E. is enough or better?? I told you the P3D night lighting looks ancient compared to MSFS.

Edited August 4, 20205 yr by B777ER

10 hours ago, Chock said:

Looks nice but I suspect when we start going over  less picturebook cities of the kind which aren't popular tourist destinations for city breaks, things will be a bit less accurate. 

No.

See, that's what people don't get. With cities that don't have photogrammetry, the AI that generates the autogen doesn't care if a town is big or small, or if it is London, Baghdad, or Wolverhampton. It always works the same, and the quality is determined by the quality of the data on Bing maps. If the data is good, the city will look good, it's that simple.

You will find that smaller towns often look more convincing than larger cities, simply because there's less opportunity for the AI to misinterpret some well-known landmark or building that everyone then complains about.

And these particular landmarks will be one area where I suspect a huge "army" of amateur third party developers will get to work on as soon as the SDK is released. There could be a ton of people soon starting up Blender to recreate their local churches, castles, or sports stadiums as custom 3D objects.

Edited August 4, 20205 yr by Der Zeitgeist