X-Plane progress

[flyingdrill]

Thought I'd have a spin in X-Plane 9 for a change, so went to somewhere near El Monte in XP9 - out of the box. No scenery add-on. Default scenery and a lot of their buildings! screenshot7
Then we went to 10.45 in around the same place, this time with UrbanMaxx v2 3D, but no extra mesh, nor photoscenery, etc. Added tons (or next one up) of objects. pa250_1
Then to 10.50b7, same area and, again, out of the box. No add-ons. Cherokee140_C_1

Hmmmm...... I reckon XP9 looks the best........ Also tried this in S. Florida, and leaving out my Miami payware, and going a bit further North, XP9 looked more realistic, placing tall buildings along the beachfront, and some others in Downtown Ft lauderdale, etc. Going further N, in Florida, where the buldings were scarce, I was getting 100+ fps in old 32 bit 9!

[flyingdrill]

Amusing to me that over 50 people have looked at my pictures, without one person saying they either agree with me or think I'm mad

[Kyle.Sanders]

Amusing to me that over 50 people have looked at my pictures, without one person saying they either agree with me or think I'm mad

I check the forums with my phone. Not easy to see the pictures lol

[Keith Smith]

I check with a 4k screen and they weren't easy to see due to how the forum displays them. Perhaps link to the pictures instead of displaying them inline?

[flyingdrill]

XP9.jpg (186.07 KiB) Viewed 5080 times

xp10_45urbanmaxx.jpg (200.88 KiB) Viewed 5080 times

xp10_50beta7.jpg (211.22 KiB) Viewed 5080 times

I've resized the images, with a loss of detail, but the general idea is visible. Should make it a bit easier to view. As I say, tell me I'm mad, and I know XP10 looks great with gigabytes of add-on meshes, etc.......

Just a bit of fun!

[Justin Lerner]

Looking at the comparisons, I actually have to agree with you. It's sad the default XP10 scenery draws the LA area barren and somewhat desolate (depending on your rendering settings). Sure, the textures are sharper and the detail finer but at the expense of making LA look closer to a dustbowl.

[Matthias Geiss]

It's one of the reasons why I decided to switch to photoreal scenery for the coverage area and turned off all autogen. Sure I don't have any 3D objects outside of airports, but at least it looks like the real thing* from about 4000ft AGL and above (at ZL16), and it's also less CPU heavy.

I only switch objects and roads on (or to be more precise: deactivate the exclusion scenery I have created in order to keep all airport objects) when flying at night, because lights are bound to them.


*real enough for someone living in germany and who has never been to california