Jump to content
Jarrad Marshall

Welcome to a New Era: Presenting FTX Innsbruck for Aerofly FS2 Flight Simulator!

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, jlund said:

"  Aerofly FS2 + Orbx + large photoreal scenery = bliss. "

Hmm, I'm not sure I agree with that. What I love about AF2 is the photoreal with autogen, and I'm afraid that with ORBX it will "just" end up looking like another FSX/P3D sim with FTX Global installed.

 

I think you misunderstood the post and/or didn't read the entire topic. No one said FTX Global is coming to AFS2 and no one would want that. The great thing however is that Orbx will be creating NEW regions with photoreal only! So they won't port their landclass products to Aerofly but create regions like the default Aerofly ones. And probably even better, with better autogen etc. Not that actually is bliss! ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Aeroflys FS 2's greatest long term weakness for a lot of people is/will-be the lack of truly wide-scale autogen. This contributes to the so called "empty" feeling that some comment on, and it's an issue that Orbx is almost uniquely suited to address.

 

Beginning to plug that hole, while maintaining Aeroflys lightning speed, will likely fulfill a lot of expectations of what a truly "Next-gen" flight simulator should look like, and hopefully attract more developers to break their exclusive attention-lock on Microsoft only, and consider exploring other options as well.

 

Once the third parties come, pretty much the sky becomes the limit.

 

Innsbruck and Meigs.... Well, paraphrasing the thread title: Welcome (hopefully) to a new era. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said. I think (or hope) that in a year or so we will all say 'Aerofly is THE sim to get and it all started when Orbx got involved'. The involvement of 3rd party developers probably is the most important thing for any flight sim and I am happy it is Orbx that is taking the lead here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" I think Aeroflys FS 2's greatest long term weakness for a lot of people is/will-be the lack of truly wide-scale autogen "

Sorry, again I disagree. I think what keeps people away from AF2 is the simple systems in the aircrafts. People are so used to that every button and every system (more or less) is just like in a real aircraft. I know that's what I miss the most. Today AF2 for me is the sim I go to if I wanna do a quick no nonsense vfr tour where I can be airborne in under 1 minute. But if I wanna do a "serious" flight, P3D is my prefered sim. Sure, ORBX autogen and airports are very beautiful, but I'd rather live with the photoreal regions we have now in AF2 (and some ai planes would be a nice addition) than another FTX look a like. Yes it's definitely a good start that ORBX show the way, so let's hope other developers will do the same

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, jlund said:

" I think Aeroflys FS 2's greatest long term weakness for a lot of people is/will-be the lack of truly wide-scale autogen "

Sorry, again I disagree. I think what keeps people away from AF2 is the simple systems in the aircrafts. 

Both could be right, for me its lack of life. However, its on PilotEdges radar and hopefully after Orbx starts to mature it in the scenery area, we will get PE coverage. With that brings traffic and ATC. While I could work with any of the planes already in that sim if I had PE and Orbx, I wouldn't not buy 3rd party planes.

AFS2 has its place and is different from the other sims which I like. I dont want it close to P3Dv4 which will be my main sim once its all set with the addons I want to have it. I want AFS2 to be my Day VFR sim for SoCal in PE.  With Orbxs offerings of KPSP, KMRY, KSAN, KSEZ and KSBA (coming soon) I could have a blast in PE flying in those areas with amazing smooth frames and the VR on PE and really get into navigating using the ground references over a GPS since its all photoreal and theres such a small difference is seasons there.

 

EDIT to add...also dont forget about those sloped runways!

Edited by Kilstorm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jlund said:

Sorry, again I disagree. I think what keeps people away from AF2 is the simple systems in the aircrafts. People are so used to that every button and every system (more or less) is just like in a real aircraft. I know that's what I miss the most.

 

But we already have (I think) enough "technical" sims.

 

X-Plane, FSX, P3D, DCS, and even Flightgear if you really want to press the point.

 

But we haven't had a pure "Joy of flying" sim for quite a while. We also haven't had a sim that offers a really open doorway for newcomers, since our older sims have kind of climbed "complexity mountain" over the years and pulled the ladder up behind them as far as true newbies are concerned.

 

If Aerofly succeeds, then the super-enthusiasts will of course demand their buttons, but I think Ipacs (and DTG!) are determined not to leave the little guys behind this time, and that to me, is a good thing.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

 

But we already have (I think) enough "technical" sims.

 

X-Plane, FSX, P3D, DCS, and even Flightgear if you really want to press the point.

 

But we haven't had a pure "Joy of flying" sim for quite a while. We also haven't had a sim that offers a really open doorway for newcomers, since our older sims have kind of climbed "complexity mountain" over the years and pulled the ladder up behind them as far as true newbies are concerned.

 

If Aerofly succeeds, then the super-enthusiasts will of course demand their buttons, but I think Ipacs (and DTG!) are determined not to leave the little guys behind this time, and that to me, is a good thing.

I think that's a very good point about complexity mountain. I'm one of those new generation simmers (despite being 50+) and despite the fact i'm craving more deep systems, the quick start made it a compelling sim to get into. Quick start for me includes the fact that my yoke, rudder and saitek panels simply worked without any faff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Aerofly FS 2 is on the right road.

 

There has been a long dispute in the simulation world: Quantity or quality. FSX/P3D/XP have the whole world, but generic scenery out of the box. Aerofly has only a few region, but very high detailed.

 

Which is better? Which one to choose? All are right. FSX/P3D/XP are right to give a backbone for the 3rd party developer to fill in the blanks. IPACS is right to give a few seclected high quality region to start with, and then expand them gradually, which is especially a good strategy for a small team with limited resources and recognition.

 

There has also been a dispute over generic or photoreal scenery. I think the answer is now more clear: photoreal wins, especially with 3d photo real buildings as seen in the Aerosoft NY DLC.

 

Generic scenery is the natural product of the old age when computing power is weak and harddisk capacity is small. When computing power grows and HD storage increases many folds, the taste has changed. 

 

Especially as Google Earth is rolling out more and more high detailed world in stunning 3D, people are more and more accustomed to photoreal scenery, and can't go back to the monotonous generic world of the past.

 

I have stronger sense of this change as I was playing FSW last night. It just looks so...FSX, the land, the buildings, the moutains...they all look so artificial. I am spoiled by Aerofly, and I simply can't go back.

 

I think the ultimate future of flight simulation is to fly in the world of Google Earth 3D VR, but that will take time even though the data and infrastructure are already there. Before we reach that goal, we can have something between, and that is the road Aerofly FS 2 is going.

 

Of course photoreal scenery is not enough. We need more autogens and better trees on top of that, but that is not unrealistic to achieve. And the cooperation with ORBX combines the best of both.

Edited by yanlaoge
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎25‎/‎2017 at 1:13 PM, raymar99 said:

 

Are we getting close to seeing the Coverage Area and some details of Meigs for AF2?

 

Regards,

Ray

Just wondering if anyone is reading these posts.

 

Regards,

 

Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been flying around in the Aerofly World the last few days, very very impressive, not a bad spot around San Martina, I think I might buy some goggles and up the experience. I have never had a flight as smooth. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, raymar99 said:

Just wondering if anyone is reading these posts.

 

Regards,

 

Ray

Wondering the same. I'm surprised they've left it so late to provide detail, which means something. Hope its good rather than bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AF2 is I think the future of simming. It's not a revamped FSX like P3D, even V4.

I have refused to move to P3D V1-2-3 in the past years because it didn't impress me, on top it was 32 bit and still stuck whit OOM.

But now I have moved to V4... and well, so far I'm not THAT impress.

 

Most people here that own (like me) AF2 will agree that the VFR flying experience is out of this world.

 

It's so different from other sim platform, it load in second, it run flawless, FPS like we have never seen.

 

So I can't wait to have LOWI installed and after we will all know with ORBX stuff if the smoothness is still there.

 

Ben

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Spit40 said:

Wondering the same. I'm surprised they've left it so late to provide detail, which means something. Hope its good rather than bad.

 

I am seldom correct when I second guess the Orbx team, but it is highly uncommon for JV to be so "silent" this close to a major release.

 

My guess it they found that if they didn't add some more buildings for the downtown area Chicago would look a little weird.  Most of the buildings in the FSX Meigs version used the base FSX scenery which was better than average for Chicago.  The Orbx team only spruced up the buildings along the Lake side that you could see on takeoff or landing at Meigs.

 

It sure would be nice if they chose to add Midway or O'Hare or both, even it is was a light version of those airports.  Meigs' single runway is too short for the heavies, although the corporate twins will love it.  They did land one airliner there, but it was a stripped down version with a test pilot for a one-way delivery for the museum.

 

Regards,

 

Ray

Edited by raymar99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, raymar99 said:

...

I am seldom correct when I second guess the Orbx team, but it is highly uncommon for JV to be so "silent" this close to a major release.

...

 

 

The reason might be even closer, the FlightSimCon 2017 which is only 5 days away. OrbX has a booth there and AirDailyX has scheduled to stream no less than 4 product demos of OrbX. CHances are Meigs might be one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Vora said:

 

The reason might be even closer, the FlightSimCon 2017 which is only 5 days away. OrbX has a booth there and AirDailyX has scheduled to stream no less than 4 product demos of OrbX. CHances are Meigs might be one of them.

 

For sure. JV stated somewhere that both LOWI and KCGX for AFS2 would be previewed at the FlightSimCon 2017 on the 10th.

 

Regards,

 

Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why all this hype about Meigs? Sure, we all have started our flightsimming experience from it, but really. It's gone and have been for some time and I'm not that nostalgic that I need to go there. I would rather they'd made London City Airpoort, which have a very steep approach, and in the center of one of the worlds biggest cities. Now THAT I would buy the minute it was out. So I was very surprised when I saw ORBX made Meigs for FSX and FSX SE, and now for AF2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jlund said:

Why all this hype about Meigs? Sure, we all have started our flightsimming experience from it, but really. It's gone and have been for some time and I'm not that nostalgic that I need to go there. I would rather they'd made London City Airpoort, which have a very steep approach, and in the center of one of the worlds biggest cities. Now THAT I would buy the minute it was out. So I was very surprised when I saw ORBX made Meigs for FSX and FSX SE, and now for AF2.

 

Yes, I am looking forward to LOWI but never understood the fun in simulating an airport that doesn't exist anymore. Perhaps the surrounding area, if large enough, will make me buy it but certainly not Meigs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, jlund said:

Why all this hype about Meigs? Sure, we all have started our flightsimming experience from it, but really. It's gone and have been for some time and I'm not that nostalgic that I need to go there. I would rather they'd made London City Airpoort, which have a very steep approach, and in the center of one of the worlds biggest cities. Now THAT I would buy the minute it was out. So I was very surprised when I saw ORBX made Meigs for FSX and FSX SE, and now for AF2.

 

It is not just about Meigs. It is about having an oasis of scenery and a place to takeoff and land near the middle of the US for Aerofly FS2,  Btw, I didn't start flight simming until after Meigs was no longer there.

 

Regards,

 

Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're silent because we're working very hard right now to get our first AFS2 products right for launch.

 

Whilst not quite ready for release day next week, we have 500,000+ buildings up and running in AFS2 at Chicago at 100+FPS *before* any optimisation. That's not a typo. We will patch that in seamlessly via FTXC once we finesse it. We can scale that to a million, 2 million or more. This engine can handle stuff others can only dream about.

 

Not a photo, an actual screenshot!!

PARK.jpg

 

How about 12,000km2 of photoreal stretching from Milwaukee down to Gary? You got it!   It's a sandbox ready for more content.

 

We are building tech right now to cover entire regions with super footprint-accurate buildings and trees. Not landclass, but photoreal.

 

This is not a race, it's a journey.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, John Venema said:

We're silent because we're working very hard right now to get our first AFS2 products right for launch.

 

Whilst not quite ready for release day next week, we have 500,000+ buildings up and running in AFS2 at Chicago at 100+FPS *before* any optimisation. That's not a typo. We will patch that in seamlessly via FTXC once we finesse it. We can scale that to a million, 2 million or more. This engine can handle stuff others can only dream about.

 

Not a photo, an actual screenshot!!

PARK.jpg

 

How about 12,000km2 of photoreal stretching from Milwaukee down to Gary? You got it!   It's a sandbox ready for more content.

 

We are building tech right now to cover entire regions with super footprint-accurate buildings and trees. Not landclass, but photoreal.

 

This is not a race, it's a journey.

 

This is explosive. I am breathless, speechless, and going to faint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, John Venema said:

We're silent because we're working very hard right now to get our first AFS2 products right for launch.

 

Whilst not quite ready for release day next week, we have 500,000+ buildings up and running in AFS2 at Chicago at 100+FPS *before* any optimisation. That's not a typo. We will patch that in seamlessly via FTXC once we finesse it. We can scale that to a million, 2 million or more. This engine can handle stuff others can only dream about.

 

Not a photo, an actual screenshot!!

PARK.jpg

 

How about 12,000km2 of photoreal stretching from Milwaukee down to Gary? You got it!   It's a sandbox ready for more content.

 

We are building tech right now to cover entire regions with super footprint-accurate buildings and trees. Not landclass, but photoreal.

 

This is not a race, it's a journey.

 

:):):)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JV....well explained.  I would ask just one thing and that is a little direction. (not a road map, just direction.)  The screen shots are impressive, the video is more impressive, but like others, I am ready to join the journey if we know where we are going.  You said there were exciting things coming this year..but I would think this was the time to hint at the intentions, so folks like me will give it a try..

 

I know the down side is number of people who expect this road map to be a release time table.....but if we don't know the intention it is hard to spend much money on a trial balloon.Just the fact this was a Steam release, makes me think GAME not simulator. If this is intended to be a real simulator, capable of serious practice and training, I would like to know that. 

 

Is the intent to develop areas like the ORBX regions...are we talking about Europe, North America like Alaska or are we talking airports?  Meigs's announcement suggests a wide area.  I am already to join the journey as long as I know it is a journey and not a flash in the pan.  The fact that ORBX is involved givs great support and the fact that you are brining this out instead of supporting X-plane speaks volumes.  Obviously the most developed Sim is P3dv4, but where are we going?  .....Time to check the bank account....I want to buy!

 

Cheers,

 

Henry

Edited by windquest
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Please* do not ignore NZ any longer!  Surely someone out there working for/with ORBX is passionate ... you could do the whole county in 20 minutes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, windquest said:

JV....well explained.  I would ask just one thing and that is a little direction. (not a road map, just direction.)  The screen shots are impressive, the video is more impressive, but like others, I am ready to join the journey if we know where we are going.  You said there were exciting things coming this year..but I would think this was the time to hint at the intentions, so folks like me will give it a try..

 

I know the down side is number of people who expect this road map to be a release time table.....but if we don't know the intention it is hard to spend much money on a trial balloon.Just the fact this was a Steam release, makes me think GAME not simulator. If this is intended to be a real simulator, capable of serious practice and training, I would like to know that. 

 

Is the intent to develop areas like the ORBX regions...are we talking about Europe, North America like Alaska or are we talking airports?  Meigs's announcement suggests a wide area.  I am already to join the journey as long as I know it is a journey and not a flash in the pan.  The fact that ORBX is involved givs great support and the fact that you are brining this out instead of supporting X-plane speaks volumes.  Obviously the most developed Sim is P3dv4, but where are we going?  .....Time to check the bank account....I want to buy!

 

Cheers,

 

Henry

 

Clearly our premiere and core platform is P3D, and we see most of our customers moving to V4 once aircraft and scenery vendors get up to speed. We make no bones about the fact that P3D is the serious study-level simulator for the hard-core simmer and it will always be our first release platform for the foreseeable future. So let's put that to bed now - Orbx and P3D are joined at the hip. Orbx landclass based scenery and airports look and perform superbly on P3Dv4 and its VR experience is also acceptable - not stellar, but acceptable. With a PTA2 solution now available P3Dv4 is one of the prettiest sims available.

 

AFS2 is what it is - a sim for the more casual flyer. I do get amused about all the forum posts complaining that there are no deep systems and "it must be a game because it's on Steam". There are many sims available on Steam. I keep referring to the "20 minute experience" and that is what it excels at - fire it up and be flying within 10-30 seconds, even for the largest scenery areas available. Nothing comes close to its performance, speed of loading, ease of use, and depth of VR capabilities. It's lighting systems are lovely and there is a pipeline of new tech coming from IPACS which will add more depth and realism. Rome wasn't built in a day, so we view AFS2 as a perfect platform when Orbx can be an influencer in some outcomes for its future.

 

Orbx's roadmap for AFS2 is to continue to port airports which fall within the current regions that IPACS offer, so that is California, Utah, Chicago area (soon), Switzerland and the NYC area. Jarrad clearly has been encouraged by his experience working with the IPACS team on LOWI so I am sure he is keen to get his west coast USA airports into AFS2 very soon.

 

Further out we will build a full-fat region in photoreal. The most obvious candidate is PNW, so that's where we will start. It will take a lot of work and need a lot of new tech (which we are investing in as we speak) to build out a photoreal full-fat region that is up to an Orbx standard. Once PNW is released then of course we have a smorgasbord of airports to then port to the sim.

 

After that who knows? We may do what we have been doing for the last five years, flipping between Europe and the USA for each subsequent region. It's also a matter of resources and watching how sales are going for our AFS2 DLC - we are a business after all.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks John for your insight, my major problem with photoreal scenery is lack of seasons, look forward to seeing where the journey takes us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic news John & thanks for sharing these insights.

Wouldn't it be great if the tech development eventually allows ORBX to build full-fat regions side-by-side so new releases for each Sim are close together.

I'm also hoping to see AUS & NZ regions come to AFS2 some time in the future, that's assuming there is enough HD photoscenery available for down under.

Edited by Dukester

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Venema said:

Further out we will build a full-fat region in photoreal. The most obvious candidate is PNW, so that's where we will start. It will take a lot of work and need a lot of new tech (which we are investing in as we speak) to build out a photoreal full-fat region that is up to an Orbx standard. Once PNW is released then of course we have a smorgasbord of airports to then port to the sim.

 

Thank you John for sharing your great vision with us! I am particularly interested in the "full-fat region in photoreal" you mentioned for the further future. I have always dreamed about OrbX autogens on top of  large areas of OrbX photoreal scenery as large as PNW. So my question is: Will these "full-fat region in photoreal" be also available for FSX/P3D?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been holding off for the last 12-18 months now, trying to decide which sim to move to.  Should I go against my better judgement and move to P3D?  Should I wait for DGFSW? Should I consider X-plane or AFS2?  Every time I think that I have made up my mind, something changes it.

 

I looked at these screenshots and within 5 seconds, had decided that it was time to move to AFS2.  Decision made.  These shots are jaw-dropping and in a different league to even the best shots that people post on this forum from P3D.  There is simply no comparison.  The spectacularly improved lighting and superior engine show what is achievable in 2017 on modern day systems....which is incredibly encouraging.

 

However, I'm not a OR/VR user and have no intention of ever opening that door.  Herein lies the problem for me.  

 

For me, the beauty of Orbx products is that they fill my whole 'flight sim world' with more realistic autogen than you can shake a stick at.  My problem with photoreal scenery is that whilst it looks incredible at 10,000ft, it tends to look blurry, washed out and flat at much lower levels.  Furthermore, it doesn't do much for immersion, when on approach there is no autogen to be seen.  The world just looks flat and lifeless from lower levels.  This kills it for me.

 

I disagree with some previous posts on this tread as I for one, would love to see Orbx produce regions for this sim that incorporate both photo real and autogen scenery.  This would make this a no-brainer for me.  But sadly (and I don't think I will be alone on this one), given that i have no intention of moving to VR, photo real regions alone will not be enough for me to invest heavily in this sim....which is a real shame given some of the other boxes that this sim ticks so emphatically.

 

I guess I will just have to continue to monitor the progress that LM have made with P3Dv4 and compare it in time to DGFSW.  It's just a shame that I don't think either are likely to be able to 'touch' the lighting engine that we are seeing in AFS2.  Horses for courses and all that jazz...

 

Cheers,

 

Calum

Edited by Caluma65

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why people need to move to one particular sim and have only that choice.

 

Why do that?

 

I would use P3D for serious simulation with hundreds of complex aircraft, ATC, weather options and hundreds of Orbx products available now. That's a no brainer. And with 64-bit P3Dv4 will soon become the defacto go-to sim for the majority of people.

 

But I also have FSW and AFS2 installed because they offer a different approach with different experiences. HDD and SSD storage is so cheap these days that your PC's capacity to install all these sims is a non-argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, John Venema said:

I don't see why people need to move to one particular sim and have only that choice.

 

It's the addons, John. While probably most of us can afford 2 or 3 simulators, not all of us are rich to buy comprehensive addon product lines for three of them in parallel.

 

Kind regards, Michael

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, John Venema said:

I don't see why people need to move to one particular sim and have only that choice.

 

Why do that?

I take your point JV and in an ideal world - that wouldn't have to be the case.  But personally, with budgetary restrictions, I would rather fully commit to one rather than spread myself more thinly across multiple platforms.

 

....still cant get over the atmosphere and lighting in AFS2....

Cheers,

 

Calum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, John Venema said:

I don't see why people need to move to one particular sim and have only that choice.

 

What we are seeing is the real end/death of FSX...  No one want OOM/VAS problem/low FPS.

 

I have a partial new rig / new install on WIN 10 and I'm not going back, and there is NO FSX installation on it.

 

Yes I will miss some heli addon like Cerasim for a long time but my decision is made up. 

 

Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much John, your response was exactly what I was questioning.  I must admit I never thought of a casual sim.  In my mind, anything on Steam was a game and for a flight Sim, a joke.  With Orbx involved with the right attitude I see your interest in steering the project.  There are a lot of applications for a casual Sim.  I am heavily involved with a small Bush Airline in Alaska concentrating on VFR traditional navigation and using a Kcars connection to record the Information.  But there are some basic requirements to use the two systems in harmony.  Since this is a VFR sim, I have to assume Low and Slow will be the trend and GA (non jet) aircraft should be the focal point.  This beautiful scenery is not impressive at 30,000 feet at 400 mph! Those with higher end cockpits will have to make sure all the hardware plays well, and obviously other developers have to join the parade.  

 

Your post has help to allay fears that this is just a game as suggested on many forums.  This costs more than P3Dv4 so we should have high expectations.  It looks like with P3Dv4 and AeroFlyFS2 are in a position to displace most of the competition including x-plane and for sure FSX.

 

I will wait until you start selling it, Steam won't get a dime from me.  I guess you could also get it from others, I even see some bundles available.  I am glad you see this as legitimate and I can conclude you will be in for the long (er) haul.

 

Thanks John, now I look forward to the airports of P3Dv4.

 

Henry 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Caluma65 said:

For me, the beauty of Orbx products is that they fill my whole 'flight sim world' with more realistic autogen than you can shake a stick at.  My problem with photoreal scenery is that whilst it looks incredible at 10,000ft, it tends to look blurry, washed out and flat at much lower levels.  Furthermore, it doesn't do much for immersion, when on approach there is no autogen to be seen.  The world just looks flat and lifeless from lower levels.  This kills it for me.

 

I disagree with some previous posts on this tread as I for one, would love to see Orbx produce regions for this sim that incorporate both photo real and autogen scenery.  This would make this a no-brainer for me.  But sadly (and I don't think I will be alone on this one), given that i have no intention of moving to VR, photo real regions alone will not be enough for me to invest heavily in this sim....which is a real shame given some of the other boxes that this sim ticks so emphatically.

 

It seems to me you are thinking photoreal means flat... which is wrong. JV already posted that the AFS2 regions(s) will be photoreal but WITH tons and tons of autogen. It will be the closest thing to reality ever. (Of course one can create their own photoreal scenery with OSM based objects in XP 11 but I am sure the Orbx regions will surpass any of those efforts in all possible ways. And in Aerofly FS 2 it will certainly perform better than XP 11 will ever do.) So, it may take some time (quite some time probably) but in the end Aerofly FS 2 with Orbx scenery actually will be the 'no brainer' you are looking for.

 

A small part of what is to come will be revealed to us all with the release of LOWI and Meigs: all photoreal with autogen (and of course a lof of hand places and specially created 3D objects).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, John Venema said:

 

I don't see why people need to move to one particular sim and have only that choice.

 

I agree with this. For me, Flight Sim is a set of experiences important to the user rather than a single application. This set of experiences/use cases is served by a suite of software that provides the scenarios that are important to me as a user. If one wants a deep simulation with advanced systems, etc., then P3Dv4 with PMDG might be in order. If one wants a beautiful night flight, X-Plane does it better than any other package (would love to see ORBX reconsider and develop for XP), if a user wants a fun experience flying in rain, perhaps FSW is the platform of choice for that use case. To fly VR and see close to true-to-life visuals, but in a casual flight, AF2 might be the best option. 

 

I have served in the capacity as an IT product owner in my professional life and our company offers multiple applications to tailor to the needs of the particular client or set of clients. This is a welcome approach by our company (the app/solution manufacturer) and the client base who is comprised of users with different needs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys, I'll just chime in here RE comments about photoreal.. 

 

I think there is a misunderstanding amongst some users about just exactly what we mean when we talk about an ORBX "photoreal" project. There is a perception that a photoreal scenery automatically means a lifeless, 2-dimensional, washed-out, unedited scenery ripped straight from a tileserver - akin to what you might find with tileproxy or lower-quality PR products.

 

This couldn't be further from the truth - not all photoreal products are created to the same standard; heck, our airports are a form of photoreal scenery. They use aerial or satellite orthoimagery source the same as any other.

 

The key difference though, is how that imagery is used. Take a PR coverage area like LOWI for example (in FSX)... from the base source imagery, hundreds and hundreds of hours are spent bringing it up to a standard I am happy with. Heavy colour editing, spot patching, removing seamline and cloud residue, "cleaning up" clutter/shadows/cars/noise in priority areas, hand-drawing blendmasks, creating full seasonal variations (much more involved than running a simple photoshop filter over a base summer image), adding snowlines for transitional seasons, creating nightmaps, watermasks, defining roads in better clarity. On top of that of course is the adding of extremely dense and accurate generic buildings and vegetation (autogen), populating light splashes, vector points such as powerlines etc. Of course different approaches will be taken for region-wide PR products (ie don't expect every 2D car footprint to be removed, ha!), but rest assured any future ORBX product will not be a lifeless, 2D scenery. 

 

Cheers,

Jarrad

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/6/2017 at 10:39 AM, Caluma65 said:

I take your point JV and in an ideal world - that wouldn't have to be the case.  But personally, with budgetary restrictions, I would rather fully commit to one rather than spread myself more thinly across multiple platforms.

 

....still cant get over the atmosphere and lighting in AFS2....

Cheers,

 

Calum

Then, this is an easy recommendation.  You will get what you are after...

1. Buy and use, mature with X-Plane 11

2. Buy and use, mature with AF2.

You will get all your options, of what you like right now, with XP11...autogen, ortho-real, study level with some 3rdP

With AF2, you will be swept along with the rest of us, that have invested and downloaded this sim.

I have all three platforms, and use them every day...  XP11, P3D v3.4, and currently updated, AF2.  As John says, who tells whom what flight, needs to be taken on what platform? Use them all!

You only have to download and try a flight in the Boeing 737, from San Diego, to Oakland...from the numbers, to the numbers, or to Sin City, and can only imagine shooting an approach over Orbx's Chicago's waterfront...to land at KORD,at  100-to infinity FPS....especially at night, with the city lit up like Christmas...I can't wait...

Edited by PNW User

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While waiting for Orbx LOWI to be released, I decided to come here one more time to watch the shots and a question came up to my mind suddenly: how did you take those shots? Did you simply use the built-in camera features or are you using some kind of (yet not available or at least unknown to me) camera tool similar to Ezdok, Chaseplane (for FSX/P3D) or X-Camera (for X-Plane)? Some aerial views suggest the use of some additional tool, which is something I often miss while in AF2.

 

Thanks

Filippo

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...