7 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

We all thought that P3D was a very good flight simulator at one point, so it would be a good idea to remember that when we start trying to compare it with the latest product. On the flip side, I always thought that FS5 was garbage, so I have no problem criticising it whenever I get the opportunity 

Still, I was amazed at FS5's attempt at photoscenery...I remember being in college and seeing a demo machine in the Biscayne Mall in Columbia, MO of all places, circa 1993, running FS5.   But I too thought, "is this really an advance?".   Like cobalt I had come from SubLogic FS-II and later, Flight Sim 4.0 -- I didn't mind FS4's solid-shape-probably-largely-machine-language-driven polygons.  FS4 ran great on a 386!  But not so for FS5...even on a 486DX2/66.

So, even FS5 had attempted to go beyond the autogen mindset into photo scenery…?

Anyway, yes, PG and our current SIM’s scenery rendition will move on to newer and (hopefully) better things, in the future…making our current impressions of it irrelevant…

 

53 minutes ago, P_7878 said:

So, even FS5 had attempted to go beyond the autogen mindset into photo scenery…?

Anyway, yes, PG and our current SIM’s scenery rendition will move on to newer and (hopefully) better things, in the future…making our current impressions of it irrelevant…

 

Oh this was well before autogen even existed.  And we still had polygon mountains.   Yes FS5 if I recall had crude photoscenery around Meigs Field in Chicago.  But as a demonstration of new tech it was amazing to me. 

It's interesting to hear people's views of where we'd be in say 2026 back in 1985.  Back then in the FS-II days I thought in 2026 we would be more advanced than we actually are today.  You can call it "kid optimism" but I really did think we'd have holograms/something along those lines in flight sim.  And as you say, in light of that perspective, all of this talk of PG or no PG makes our current impressions irrelevant.  Someone will see this thread in 50 years and chuckle.

 

MSE baby, oh yeah … look at that FPS, locked solid as a rock at 60

Edited February 25Feb 25 by SayAgain

2 hours ago, Mace said:

Oh this was well before autogen even existed.  And we still had polygon mountains.   Yes FS5 if I recall had crude photoscenery around Meigs Field in Chicago.  But as a demonstration of new tech it was amazing to me. 

It's interesting to hear people's views of where we'd be in say 2026 back in 1985.  Back then in the FS-II days I thought in 2026 we would be more advanced than we actually are today.  You can call it "kid optimism" but I really did think we'd have holograms/something along those lines in flight sim.  And as you say, in light of that perspective, all of this talk of PG or no PG makes our current impressions irrelevant.  Someone will see this thread in 50 years and chuckle.

Very interesting, Rhett...!

It's fascinating to know how our SIM has advanced through the years and decades. You must have been a visionary, back in 1985, to imagine our 2026 SIM to be more advanced than what it is today...🙂...holograms included. After all, the HUDs we see in the 737, 787 and 350 SIM cockpits are examples of holography in these aircraft, based on laser technology.

I'd once a chance to attend a lecture of Arthur Schawlow, co-inventor of the laser, later faculty of Stanford University.  During the lecture, he asked for a laser pointer for his screen, and joked, "btw, here is another useful application of my invention"...🙂...

I'm always fascinated by progression of technology, whether in SIM or in real Aviation. I distinctly recall a statement by a spokesman of Avianca (airlines), the world's second-oldest airline (KLM beat Avianca for the title by less than 2 months), and the oldest in the Americas (significantly older than the U.S. majors). They had just gone paperless in the cockpit, not via modern EFB, but via iPads (used as EFB), around 2012-2013. These are the folks who had started operations with Junkers F.13, back in 1919, navigating by the use of (South American) rivers, and are now flying 787 Dreamliners.  From Junkers F.13 to the 787, across 106 years, they have seen it all, in terms of the aerospace technology evolution. I could sense the excitement of the Spokesperson on the introduction of iPads into the cockpits...they seemed to really appreciate the use of iPads.

Anyway, yes, someone in 50 years from now, will look at this thread, and, maybe, say these guys were real simpletons...🙂... Oh well...

Edited February 25Feb 25 by P_7878

35 minutes ago, SayAgain said:

MSE baby, oh yeah … look at that FPS, locked solid as a rock at 60

Yes, that's MSE for sure...no doubt...

I'm not sure how MSE compared to the Ortho of XP. When I was routinely posting MSE/FSX pictures in the (nearby) Screenshots Forum, XP was quite active there, and folks were posting their flying over Ortho based Photo Scenery.

I never touched XP...been always a MS simulator-based simmer...🙂...

I just keep it on - It's not perfect by all means. 

13 hours ago, Mace said:

Still, I was amazed at FS5's attempt at photoscenery...I remember being in college and seeing a demo machine in the Biscayne Mall in Columbia, MO of all places, circa 1993, running FS5.   But I too thought, "is this really an advance?".   Like cobalt I had come from SubLogic FS-II and later, Flight Sim 4.0 -- I didn't mind FS4's solid-shape-probably-largely-machine-language-driven polygons.  FS4 ran great on a 386!  But not so for FS5...even on a 486DX2/66.

I do remember that there were a handful of (very) small areas with considerably better graphics than the default rubbish. One of those was Meigs Field in Chicago, and I seem to remember Martha's Vineyard being another. Unfortunately, these were nowhere near large (or numerous) enough to swing the pendulum my way.

I have to bring this thread back from the dead because today I got tired of blocky trees and decided to disable PG. I can't believe how much better the sim looks. I now have to continue to look for add on cities.

What will I miss with PG disabled?

Right now I'm leaning toward keeping it off because I like what I see in the Tampa Bay area. But, will have to check out other cities.

2 minutes ago, CFIJose said:

I have to bring this thread back from the dead because today I got tired of blocky trees and decided to disable PG. I can't believe how much better the sim looks. I now have to continue to look for add on cities.

What will I miss with PG disabled?

Right now I'm leaning toward keeping it off because I like what I see in the Tampa Bay area. But, will have to check out other cities.

I don't miss much in my experience because when I use the sim I use it mostly to simulate airline ops, with Buses and Boings, so... most of the time I'm cruising at high FLs, sometimes with a mant of clouds bellow hiding the terrain and it's details.

I do enable PG if, for instance, I want to show my sim to someone, and use an helicopter to fly next to a place where it is worth checking how close to real the looks of villages, towns, plants, ... are in MSFS 2024.

Having it disabled I stroongly believe I save CPU / GPU and net bandwidth...

1 minute ago, jcomm said:

I don't miss much in my experience because when I use the sim I use it mostly to simulate airline ops, with Buses and Boings, so... most of the time I'm cruising at high FLs, sometimes with a mant of clouds bellow hiding the terrain and it's details.

I do enable PG if, for instance, I want to show my sim to someone, and use an helicopter to fly next to a place where it is worth checking how close to real the looks of villages, towns, plants, ... are in MSFS 2024.

Having it disabled I stroongly believe I save CPU / GPU and net bandwidth...

Even with Bijan's Enhanced Seasons there are too many areas in the sim where these blocky trees or melted buildings show up. I can't believe how much better v2024 looks, but I know most people don't have the addon payware or freeware cities that really show how much better the sim looks with PG OFF. Where PG is supposed to be better is in places like the Grand Canyon.

Still testing.

Welcome to the dark side, Jose. You need patience to deal with the flaws of PG, but the dark side is quicker/easier/more seductive. Once you start down this path, forever will it dominate your destiny 

The only thing more overrated than PG is high TLOD values as the performance cost:benefit is really poor, IMO of course and with respect to all of my settings as they are.  This morning I flew out of LSGG and accidentally had TLOD at 250 and the result was poor choppy panning, and had PG on as well and lots of melted trees/buildings nearby.  When I turned TLOD to 100, I saw exactly ZERO difference in visuals near and far and resumption of normal smooth panning in cockpit during pre-flight and taxi; and PG off looked far better, including vegetation.  I do use PG in areas where it might be best provided there is very little melted objects.

I've never liked these new fangled steam engines.

Give me a horse and cart any day...or better still; a sedan chair...

6 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

Welcome to the dark side, Jose. You need patience to deal with the flaws of PG, but the dark side is quicker/easier/more seductive. Once you start down this path, forever will it dominate your destiny 

Cheers!