lancer24 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Hi, I have not as yet bought any Orbx products yet but am blown away with the measure of detail the sceneries have. Before I buy anything I was wondering is Orbx FTX Global Vector the same product as FS Global Ultimate Americas, Europe, Asia? I bought FS Global Ultimate Asia Oceana a few years ago, before I knew of Orbx, but did not install it. Should I buy FS Global Ultimate Americas too, or is Orbx FTX Global Vector better with detail. I am actually looking to get the most realistic representation of the earth as possible and I am wondering which product...Orbx FTX Global Vector or FS Global Ultimate Americas, Europe, Asia Oceana does the job best. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewart Hobson Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Quick answer: The two products are not the same. FS Global Ultimate Americas (which I have, btw) provides the mesh for the terrain in the sim. FTX Vector draws in coastlines, rivers, roads, etc. Look for the Guide to Orbx products elsewhere on this site. It will explain everything you wanted to know and then some. Here: http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/74345-the-definitive-guide-to-ftx-products-the-go-to-source-of-ftx-information/ Stew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancer24 Posted October 8, 2015 Author Share Posted October 8, 2015 Hi, thanks for the link...it was very informative It has me wondering about another question. How compatible is Orbx and Pilot's products to say...Megascenery? I have a few states of Megascenery scenery and I was planning on using both Orbx and Pilots products along with Megascenery. I was thinking using Orbx and Pilot's products to render the world (which is so much better than the default scenery) and then laying Megascenery on top of the Orbx and Pilots products of my home state. I think it would make my home state look ultra realistic Do you think they would all be compatible with each other? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewart Hobson Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Hi, thanks for the link...it was very informative It has me wondering about another question. How compatible is Orbx and Pilot's products to say...Megascenery? I have a few states of Megascenery scenery and I was planning on using both Orbx and Pilots products along with Megascenery. I was thinking using Orbx and Pilot's products to render the world (which is so much better than the default scenery) and then laying Megascenery on top of the Orbx and Pilots products of my home state. I think it would make my home state look ultra realistic Do you think they would all be compatible with each other? Any help would be greatly appreciated. They are compatible. What is your home state? Your Megascenery Earth entries should be placed below any Orbx regions you may have. But in any case the MSE entry will always take precedence over the Orbx scenery. The problem with the MSE scenery, as I see it, is that you see the same scenery, no matter what season it is. With Orbx scenery you get to see seasonal changes. So in autumn you see the trees changing color, in winter there's snow on the ground, when appropriate. With the MSE scenery it's all the same, autumn, winter, spring or summer. So I now longer use MSE scenery. Lots of $$ spent, but now I know better. Live and learn! Stew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Newman Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Another couple of points with most photo real scenery (such as Megascenery products) is: 1. The color palettes are generally not as vibrant as Orbx, so the borders between the photo real and Orbx areas can be very sharp. 2. Photo real areas generally do not contain autogen objects, or if they do, they are generally not lined up with the buildings or trees shown on the photo scenery, or the autogen is only found in certain limited areas. This makes flying low look very artificial and quite literally, flat. 3. Photo real areas take up huge amounts of disk space compared to land class based terrain such as FTX products. Generally speaking, photo real areas are great for those flying at high altitude, where the lack of 3D objects doesn't matter, so like all things, it all depends just how you plan on flying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewart Hobson Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Another couple of points with most photo real scenery (such as Megascenery products) is: 1. The color palettes are generally not as vibrant as Orbx, so the borders between the photo real and Orbx areas can be very sharp. 2. Photo real areas generally do not contain autogen objects, or if they do, they are generally not lined up with the buildings or trees shown on the photo scenery, or the autogen is only found in certain limited areas. This makes flying low look very artificial and quite literally, flat. 3. Photo real areas take up huge amounts of disk space compared to land class based terrain such as FTX products. Generally speaking, photo real areas are great for those flying at high altitude, where the lack of 3D objects doesn't matter, so like all things, it all depends just how you plan on flying. All valid points, of course, Rob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancer24 Posted October 9, 2015 Author Share Posted October 9, 2015 Hi, glad to hear that they are all compatible My home state is California, San Diego area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.