olderndirt Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 This is definitely not a deal breaker but worthy of note. My first major LC city visit was Athens and there was the Acropolis in what looked like a decent spot. Moved over to Rome and found the spotting of the Coloseum and St Peters to be, at best, haphazard. It seems silly to spend the time with these historical scenery objects and not make them fit reasonably well with the rest of the scenery. I realize photoreal is not the name of the game here so why even bother? - as it is, it actually detracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfko Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 I had the same thoughts when I flew over Venice. EU LC placed lots of modern (!) buildings there with the historical Doge's Palace and the Campanile in the middle of them. This really does not look nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taph Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 I understand your feeling, however I find they add to the skyline and until someone does a city scape they are all we have. Hopefully some of our budding developers will take them on board, Portland, Edinburgh, Hastings and Dover have had a makeover Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Routley Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 I don't think the objects in question are part of the OpenLC product. Indeed, they are likely to be default FSX objects -- so not even art of FTX at all! If I understand your post, you are familiar with how Landclass textures display in the sim. They will almost never integrate with 3D scenery. The only way to get these to integrate is, in fact, using photoscenery as you suggest. That (for the scope of EU) is WAY outside the scope of this product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.