PilotEdge Forums

So I'm guessing the photo scenery is good enough quality to fly IFR: I Follow Roads

John

I just loaded g2xpl for the SoCal area this weekend. Wow, what a impressive difference to have the orthophoto scenery textures. Took a bit of time, but well worth the effort IMO. No difference in frame rates. I loaded all 1x1 degree tiles at Zoom Level 15 and the urban regions bumped up to 17. A few screen shots . . .

One more . . .

There's no 3d objects then right if you do that? 3d meaning autogen (what it's called in FSX/P3D)

Ryan B wrote:There's no 3d objects then right if you do that? 3d meaning autogen (what it's called in FSX/P3D)

Not none. Just a few - I use the default setting. That gives me a few tall buildings downtown and all the 3-D buildings in the custom airports. Otherwise, I really don't like the look of the simulated 3-D houses and buildings. To me they look fake compared to just having the photo imagery alone. Plus, it taxes the heck out of frame rates. I turn off the 3-D trees too, not a fan of them and they end up on roads and weird places. I do turn up the objects and road traffic for night time though - love the city lights.

Ryan,

Here's an approach into Palm Springs at about 4000 ft agl showing both the g2xpl photo scenery with and without 3D objects. Personally, I don't think the objects add much, and actually make it look a bit to cartoonish. So I'd rather just go with the photo texture and have default objects for towers and airport buildings etc.

Nighttime though is another story. Maxing out the objects and roads at night is much more realistic than default settings. Default is like a major power grid failure, with a few backup generators running here and there.