Jump to content

Should I expect better rendition ?


Recommended Posts

Can someone possibly confirm whether my scenery is displaying as would be expected.   My reason for asking is that I am going thru virtual PPL training but having real difficulty identifying locations in my scenery.   As an example, I use EGTB ( Wycombe ) as the training base with the training area to the north of it around Aylesbury.   I am using Orbx Global Base, Global Vector, OpenLC Europe and Region England.    I have attached a couple of screen shots.  The first is with all Orbx deactivated in the Scenery Library, and the second with everything active.   There is a difference, but it's not huge, or maybe I am expecting too much ?    Would you expect more of a difference ?   


It may be it's my hardware.   i5 7600K OC at 4.5Ghz, 16 Gb RAM and an MSI GTX970 graphics card.    It easily produces 100+ fps.    My monitor is a fairly old 22in with DVI connection running at native resolution 1600x1050.   Would a better monitor say something like 2560x1440p using the Display Port render better results ?  The whole PC will be upgraded in the fullness of time, but would appreciate any guidance on whether a better monitor may derive better results in the short term.

 

Thank you
Capture.thumb.JPG.f516e37f11f008031093506c4c611ada.JPGCapture3.thumb.JPG.801e4b0da44486c51062c970e087d064.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

you cannot deactivate Global base, as it has replaced all of your default textures.

There are, for example, no yellow rape flower fields in the default simulator.

I thing that your are seeing your Orbx purchases in both shots.

 

Landclass scenery cannot replicate the real world, it can only represent it.

 

Photo scenery does replicate the real world, but only at the time that the images were created.

Any subsequent changes, such as new roads, housing estates, industrial estates and so on will not be seen. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quick reply Nick.  I should have added that my graphics settings are all at maximum.   I understand the limitations in terms of when the photoreal images were taken, so I suppose I'm asking if you would expect more detail from the photoreal scenery when at max settings ?  eg the grey area just below the aircraft nose is a railway station, but hardly discernable.  In general I cannot identify railway lines which would be a great help in VFR ;-)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

Vector is very good at railway lines, but I would agree that they are nowhere near as easy to see as they are in the real world.

I don't usually approve of comparisons between simulators but it seems to me that the ideal for you would be the new Microsoft Flight Simulator.

I have recently flown one of the routes that I used to follow when driving a lorry to and from Spain, through western France.

In MSFS, I could identify every road, down to the road markings, the parking areas where I used to stay overnight, the payages on the motorways,

the bridges and all of the cities, towns and villages that I used to pass through.

All this from the air, having never seen any of it except out of the windscreen.

This is just a suggestion and does not imply any criticism of either FSX or the Orbx landclass products.

Unfortunately, the Orbx True Earth GB products, which feature photo scenery cannot be used with FSX, or I would also have recommended them.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the same area depicted in my screenshots on FS2020  yesterday, and you are so right.  It looked stunning.  I suppose like many, I have so much invested in FSX that I am reluctant to move to the new sim, but I think it will happen eventually, although my spec may struggle a bit.  Or possibly I will end up using FS2020 for VFR and keep FSX for my flying my expensive payware "big tin" aircraft.     Thank you for your thoughts.

 

Regards   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, zimmer46 said:

I saw the same area depicted in my screenshots on FS2020  yesterday, and you are so right.  It looked stunning.  I suppose like many, I have so much invested in FSX that I am reluctant to move to the new sim, but I think it will happen eventually, although my spec may struggle a bit.  Or possibly I will end up using FS2020 for VFR and keep FSX for my flying my expensive payware "big tin" aircraft.     Thank you for your thoughts.

 

Regards   

And in MSFS you get the bonus of a dynamic atmosphere, as you fly over undulating or mountainous country when there's wind about it will rock you about just like the real world. I don't know what your specs are but my 6-7 yo CPU with the 1080ti card and high end settings gives me butter smooth performance. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, John Dow said:

And in MSFS you get the bonus of a dynamic atmosphere, as you fly over undulating or mountainous country when there's wind about it will rock you about just like the real world. I don't know what your specs are but my 6-7 yo CPU with the 1080ti card and high end settings gives me butter smooth performance. 

Seeing your PC spec is useful.    I'm running an  i5 7600K OC at 4.5Ghz, 16 Gb RAM and an MSI GTX970 4Gb graphics card, 22" monitor at 1600x1050.  I plan to change the monitor to something with 1440p and use the GTX970's Display Port as an immediate upgrade.  The expensive stuff will need to wait until the GPU prices start to fall.  My graphics card is the the weakest link, but I would hope the PC could run MSFS at an acceptable level.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before the 1080ti I had a 1080 8GB and it performed well, maybe if you found one cheap, I think your CPU and RAM are good enough. Check benchmarks for your CPU vs mine, should be faster, though even with MSFS I think single core performance is the main thing to look at. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...