Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Very interested, but as a glider pilot I'd be most interested in Southern Germany, for instance everything below Cologne.

 

This would also mean a 60 or 70Gb download instead of 120Gb. A considerable difference I think. I'd opt in for Aerofly :)

Edited by Hans Bodde

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would definitely buy it for AF2 and most likely for Prepar3dv4. Not sure about XP11 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not buy AF2 yet, because I am not too much interested in the currently available regions. Only for the ORBX airports I am not buying it. But I'd actually buy it for a photoreal Germany. Since it does not support seasons yet, I wouldn't care about it as feature anyway. I'd stay in P3D with GEN / GES and fly in AF2 a photoreal Germany :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely support Germany Photoreal, and everything photoreal. This is not just out of personal preference, but my observation of the technology as well.

I know photoreal has existed since many years ago, and many people are not very keen on it. But the situation has changed. The time of photoreal is more suited for today, and for the  future:

 

1. Photoreal used to be flat, or just some misplaced autogens, but this has greatly changed. The growing GIS information and OpenStreetMap database can now add millions of 3D objects accurately and automatically. This is also where Orbx excels and truly shines.

 

2. Photoreal resolution used to be confined by HD storage. We used to think several GB massive and hard accept, but this has now greatly changed, thanks to the dropping of hard disk price , the growing storage capacity,  and the fast broadband speed today. I'd happy to download a 100GB Germany photoreal, in less than 1 hours.

 

3. The taste has changed. We are treated to high resolution images, videos, and VR. We long for the real thing more than ever. When I am using Google Earth VR every day, I can no longer go back to the false generic map any more. 

 

4. Ultimately I think the future of the scenery of flight simulation is something like Google Earth VR, with much higher resolution. Everything is made with 3D scan, or 3D photogrammetry of the real world, but that might be more than 10 years away. Photoreal plus 3D cultivation with exact GIS information will be the more realistic for now, and would be grafted seamless to the future.  

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in. Disk is getting cheaper by the minute and hires photoreal looks fantastic even flying low. Loads of data for autogen these days, so it should look fantastic. I'm sure Orbx Netherlands will demonstrate this to the old guard.  I'd prefer the UK, but I'll certainly take Germany.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

How many of you would be interested in a photoreal version of the whole country of Germany

I am very interested, but only for the Aerofly FS2, if the quality is as good as Switzerland (from Ipacs). This is because my use of FSX / P3D is now minimal in favor of FSW and AFS2.

 

Edited by alcliff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm liking Yanlaoge's post, a LOT! I don't know much about the Google Earth stuff, but I do feel that photoreal with autogen is going to be the future.

 

I've spent the last few days pondering my own direction in simming, (because I'm a tight t**t and I didn't want to waste too much money in the sale), and whilst I'll certainly keep my FSX with photoreal Europe (mostly freeware) for the A2A and PMDG aircraft I have, ultimately, I can see myself going down the Aerofly VR route.

 

So, like so many others have said, I'd by an OrbX photoreal Germany ( and Netherlands) for Aerofly. In part, due to its performance headroom, and in part, Aerofly FS2 and autogened photoreal just looks so 'right'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's never gonna be consensus regarding landclass vs photoreal, simply because people use their simulator in different ways and have different interests. Both have pros and cons, though I always find it funny to see LC-proponents drool over screenshots with mostly PR-content.  Personally, I'm in the PR-camp.

 

However, there are two issues that I've always found annoying about PR-scenery: "banding" and (the lack of) colour correction. You can see an example of the latter in the Bilbao-area in Google Maps (the PR of the city is much lighter than the surrounding area). These issues are magnified if the coverage is very large, so one would need very high quality source material. Even then there's probably a need to do a lot of (time and money-) intensive colour correction. Which makes it harder to keep the price down.

 

I understand that the availability of high quality source material (and the proximity to the upcoming PR Netherlands-product) is the main reason why Orbx is looking at Germany. I personally think however that for FSX/P3D this makes less sense. First of all because Orbx already offers a LC-based product covering Germany. I'd rather see Orbx doing Switzerland, Austria and northern Italy in photoreal (and maybe an "add-on pack covering the French and Bavarian Alps in full PR).

But another aspect for me is that I prefer a continuous (seamless) coverage instead of a constant switch between LC and PR (TBH, I found the semi PR-mountains in GES and southern Alaska rather disappointing). To me, that maginifies the cons of each class of scenery. So the blending between the two has to be exceptional. 

 

 

Edited by Lawman
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my personal opinion: I will definitely buy it for P3D, and 120 GB of disk space is nowadays not such a big deal anymore. I have a lot of photoreal scenery for Southern Europe (with autogen), the Alps and the US, all stored on an external HD drive, which doesn't cost that much anymore today.

 

 

Edited by bernd1151

Share this post


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

I do feel that photoreal with autogen is going to be the future.

+1 (again, just my own opinion, no offense to anyone here, who has a different view)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Sniper31 said:

.... Which brings up a side question...is the upcoming photoreal Netherlands package only going to depict one season, or all seasons represented?...

 

 

 

It will have 5 seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes!!!

I would love to buy Germany photoreal for Aerofly FS2.

 

The aerial images will be the perfect ground to add airports in any later stages.

Also cultivation in Aerofly FS 2 (autogen) evolves more and more, several tools are already available for the users in combination with OSM data.

Disk space will be less important from year to year.

Seasons may be added sometime in the future.

 

And of course it fits excellent in between the existing DLCs Switzerland, Innsbruck and Netherlands.

 

Rodeo

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, "it depends". Most of the photoreal I've tried has been subsequently removed from my system, much of it is appalling. Although I've just installed my first piece of France VFR (if I'm allowed to say that here) and been impressed with that. I share the views about seasons, but apart from that it will depend on the quality of the PR backgrounds and the amount and quality of the autogen. If the NL project arrives first I'll certainly be buying that, and I guess that will either convert me or not. I've bought everything else ORBX has produced, and I'll probably continue to do so unless I get really turned off by the PR stuff, which I kind of doubt, given the general quality of ORBX materials.

 

For my ideal (virtual) world, I'd be able to fly real low and slow (helicopter style, maybe 500 feet or thereabouts) and see accurate and non-blurry ground features with accurately placed and realistic roads, vegetation and buildings. Maybe I don't need better scenery - just better drugs!

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- One season? No proplem (summer pilot).

- 130+ GB? No problem (HDs are cheap these days).

 

So, being a kraut, I would surely buy Germany PR. But that is the point. I do know my country well enough from above to recognize the advantage of PR over LC in this regard. I also fly (in RL) over NL, CH and A, so I have the freeware or payware PR sceneries of those countries as well. But if I don't personally know the country from above the disadvantages of PR over LC become too much to bother. So I will buy the PR Netherlands, and I will buy a PR Germany, but I'm pretty sure won't buy a PR PNW. Hell, I don't even have the existing PR France or upcoming PR Italy from other developers on my radar.

That being said, Germany is a big FS market and the ability to apply the same resources to all current 64bit platforms somehow mitigates the risk. So, I'd say go for it. Ofc I am biased regarding this case.

 

If you want to have the same quality for Germany as seen on the NL pics then you probably got a ton of work ahead of you. I just hope that this development does not stall the work on the LC regions as a whole. 

Edited by Vora

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I right that lighting of mountains and hills will be hard coded into such a German PR scenery? For me this (besides the lack of seasons) is a major drawback of photoreal sceneries like the AF2 ones. It can be quite disturbing for immersion in AF2 when the sun sets in the west but the mountains are illuminated from the east (hard coded). Additionally In P3D the shadows of the mountains would again be pointing into the right direction.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

But another aspect for me is that I prefer a continuous (seamless) coverage instead of a constant switch between LC and PR (TBH, I found the semi PR-mountains in GES and southern Alaska rather disappointing). To me, that maginifies the cons of each class of scenery. So the blending between the two has to be exceptional. 

That's an important aspect indeed. Landclass as well as a photo scenery both have pros and cons - but I find transitions between them very annoying, and in either direction. It's not just the boundary, sometimes it's like flying from one world into another one. As unreal as it gets.

 

This can work better or worse. FTX GES to/from Flugwerk Austria Pro HD isn't too nasty, but still different of course. I recall the former Aerosoft VFR Germany to/from Flylogic Switzerland was terrible, even though both were good products at their time.

 

Kind regards, Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, to be honest i didn't buy the actual Germany. For me flying wise it's not my cup of tea.

 

Since your question is very precise and it's about Germany, my answer is no and even for AF2 (that I love)

 

My suggestion, anything that as mountainous relief. Take what IPACS did lately, Colorado state. Even their telluride is more then acceptable. 

 

Cheers, Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy new year to you too John.

I keep off for a while because of two reasons:

1. I want to see first how The Netherlands looks in PR

2. I'm currently (and would be in the future) enjoying GES too much to already say goodbye to it. :)

 

Ben.

Edited by bvdboomen
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer to test at first the announced PNW PR which hopefully includes the 4 seasons. PNW has many different terrains and landscapes embedded in one region and this should represent the PR visual quality.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm concerned only by Xplane .For me "Germany Photoreal" if (Photoreal + Autogen) will be the ultimate solution.I'm tired of flying over landscapes that "look like" even though it brought me a lot of happiness.Today i want to recognize, discover the whole world as he is really .I want the same emotions when I fly in reality my eyes stuck to the porthole.I want a modern decor in its overallity.I want evolution and progression...I want products that look like 2018.

-One season? No proplem at all

-130+ GB? No problem at all

 

Give me Europe for 3TB...I buy it without hesitation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would purchase this for AFS2, especially given your intimation that the imagery is 'pristine'.  The clarity of image would shine in 2D and VR alike.  I would really appreciate a unified portion of Europe for both GA and regional flights as I rarely do long-haul.  A few thoughts.....

 

1)  I would buy this especially if it included a nice variety of 3D trees/vegetation to replace the stock Aerofly ones; this is one of the nicest aspects of GES.

2)  File size is not a concern of mine.  Aerofly rocks just dandy on a standard cost effective HDD; save your SSD for your OS and other more pressing needs.

3)  The install/remove process with FTX Central has dramatically reduced my frustration with adding/removing product or having too much on my main FS drive. 

4)  I plan to flight sim forever!  Sometimes I just like to explore an area I have never been.  Photoreal is more interesting to me, this is particularly true if I am only exploring areas that I likely will never fly over again.  PR allows me to experience the little villages, hamlets, side roads, and farms.  To me the terrain at high altitude is noticeably more varied than even the best LC.

5)  A unified Netherlands/Germany/IPACS Switzerland would make for a wonderful European vacation.

6)  Some are converting their own scenery for AFS2 via SDK, I am one who would prefer to leave it to the experts. 

7)  I suspect Netherlands will set a new bar for NON-Aerofly sims; the slow move away from our beloved LC is inevitable. (ala winXP)  New simmers who are coming along are, in my view, sure to expect Google Earth level imagery.

 

JV, the interesting thing here is that ORBX is in a position to set direction; your 2018 roadmap is both an appreciated courtesy to the community and a vision of the future.  I hope the future includes this Germany PR project.

Edited by uoutoftoon
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about season?

But also about hours of the day and the shadows?

I have some photoreal sceneries of mountains and I dislike it cause shadows are not accurate at all !

 

Bug.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I already have the whole of Europe in Orthophotos for XP11 but, as I`ve said before, I would gladly pay for a product that offers a superior quality/experience!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Germany I probably would not buy. Although i fully support and like your move to deliver more photoreal areas. Had you said Switzerland or Austria I would not have hesitated for a second. Germany like the UK is just too flat in my opinion. Austria would be awesome just seeing your beautiful Innsbruck addon and knowing the whole country was available in similar qulity, wow!! I know one could argue a summer only version is already available from another developer but it has many shortcomings.

 

mike

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would definitely buy this, both for P3D and AFS2. In the past I have avoided photoreal for so many reasons (it was FLAT!!!), but it seems to me that the technology we are seeing in AFS2, X-Plane and in your Netherlands alpha shots is changing this. I would be very happy to pay to have Germany in LC and PR formats, so I can try various sorts of flights in both and find out exactly where each is best, whether shadows and so on will be a problem and so on.

I would also like to have seasons, four if possible, but two would probably be OK.

I do think it would be important to have an easy way to switch back and forth between them, though, presumably with FTX Central, without too much hassle (or AES problems).

I don't think disk space matters at all, we just have to accept that data expands to fill the space available! Download times will be important to some people who may need an alternative for 120GB, but I don't know what that would be.

 

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another question: Would a possible PR scenery also be split into North and South? If so, I would definitely be interested in Southern Germany for P3D4more than in Northern Germany - for the single reason that I'm living in Southern Germany and 60 GB or 120 GB would make quite a difference for me.

If it's not split... well I know myself best - sooner or later I can't resist buying it anyway ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Bugdani said:

What about season?

But also about hours of the day and the shadows?

I have some photoreal sceneries of mountains and I dislike it cause shadows are not accurate at all !

 

Bug.

 

I can't say for sure if it will be the same for ORBX regions, but I know when larger PR areas have been done around airports, ORBX devs have edited the PR to remove some or most of the inaccurate shadowing you can get with PR imagery.  Personally I don't mind a bit of shadowing, but it can be edited out.

 

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

would prefer Norway 100 times more than Germany personally. Hard to find a more visually stunning country with its mountains and fjords. Possibly the only match would be the south island of New Zealand :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it will be so great to have Norway photoreal scenery (and agree too with Austria :wub:), but unfortunately all regions can't be feasible cause to satellite imagery prices. And John Venema already said in the NL topic that Norway (as UK) cost too much license money for an Orbx photoreal project.

So when it's possible for Orbx to make a photoreal scenery of a country personally i'm happy and don't care too much which country is, i think it's just a great opportunity to have a new place to fly and to discover, so i want it :) (and have only AFS2, so don't have too much items to buy actually :P)

Edited by Raspou
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, mikced76 said:

Had you said Switzerland or Austria I would not have hesitated for a second. Germany like the UK is just too flat in my opinion. Austria would be awesome just seeing your beautiful Innsbruck addon and knowing the whole country was available in similar qulity, wow!! I know one could argue a summer only version is already available from another developer but it has many shortcomings.

 

You may or may not know there is an outstanding Austria Photoscenery with Autogen, Custom buildings and POIs available already.  It lacks seasons and ORBX enhanced airports, but I suppose you can subtract a noticeable number of potential buyers anway.

 

This is for FSX/Prepar3d. AeroflyFS2 and XP may be another story.

 

Kind regards, Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an Aerofly FS 2 guy, yes I would be very interested and would buy it the moment it appeared in FTX Central.

 

A strong yes vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mikced76 said:

Michael, that is the Austria scenery I was refering to. Not so outstanding in my opinion.

Really...? I like it quite well. Anyway, we'll certainly get a better judgement after having seen ORBX NL for comparison. 

 

Kind regards, Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Germany would be very interesting for me (especially South Germany). There are beautiful lakes, forests and mountains as well as big cities.

It would be very nice to have them in AFS2!

 

Kind regards, Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...