Jump to content

MegaScenery? Not impressed!


Recommended Posts

So after all the hype that I have heard about how fantastic Mega scenery Earth is I decided to purchase some.  So I bought MS Florida for $39.95. Now I realize that Florida is not the most geographically interesting place as it is so flat, but I was expecting there to be at the least a marginal improvement over the default FSX and at best to be stunned, as I am with ORBX PNW and NCA, but I was very disappointed, especially after the amount of time it took to download over 25GB of data.

 

Here are some shots flying around Miami cruising at around 1,000ft.  Everything looks so 2 dimensional and sparse.  Downtown Miami should be better that this.  IMHO, I think that I deserve more for $40.

Any suggestions?  Any differing opinions?  PCAviators California set was impressive.  Is it jus that Florida is boring and not much can be done?

Mega_Florida2_zps713a2661.jpg

Mega_Florida1_zps1db5eab9.jpg

Mega_Florida5_zps2fc76bb0.jpg

Mega_Florida6_zps0b6b99c6.jpg

Mega_Florida4_zps582e2a2a.jpg

Mega_Florida7_zpsa0a02f12.jpg

Mega_Florida8_zps90f9fe40.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

MSE is more for high flying, above 5000' or more.  MSE are doing Mega-cities which are more suited to above 500' but smaller in area.

 

As by my siggy below I am an addict of MSE, but only use it when flying (High) the tube-liners.  For all low level and night work I use ORBX.

 

Sorry you feel duped, but get up higher and you will enjoy it better..  :)

 

Also if you are going to show sreenshots of any photoreal, then zoom out from the aircraft and you will not suffer blurries..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a shot at a higher altitude near Orland, which does look a bit better.

Mega_Orlando_CC1_zps91554ecc.jpg

 

But here is a shot over Cape Canaveral at about 2,000 ft. So-so.

Mega_Orlando_CC2_zps106655e3.jpg

 

 

So this scenery is more for enjoying flying commercial at 35,000 ft .  Somehow I thought it would be better at lower altitudes based on the Video on Mega Scenerey's website and their own screenshots.

Link to post
Share on other sites

33,000 ft at the Florida Georgia border

 

FSX Default

FL_FSX_zps4ac0f548.jpg

 

Mega scenery.  Different? Yes! Better?  I suppose.  What I expected for $40 ($30 after a 25% discount)?  No!  Would I but another region of theirs?  No!  Think I will stick with ORBX. 

FL_MS_zps803a2285.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also bought florida and not putting too much of a gloss on it found it to be total crap, yet the creators and the resellers had the gall to gang up on me when I said the free Belgium photoscenery was great. I am glad that someone else has had the balls to say it like it is . Needless to say when I wrote a letter in complaint to megascenery they didnt have the balls to answer me. Yet they still send me offers of huge discounts to buy this and that , no doubt they are having problems selling their stuff, I can understand why, would i buy another of their products? no i would prefer to have a frontal lobotomy.

no doubt this post will result in another dose of flameing but my shoulders are broad

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like James says, photo-real textures don't work for everyone, and you need to be mindful of altitude - too low, and you see the limitations of simply pasting photo tiles on the mesh. Also, auto-generated scenery objects -not 'hand placed' scenery objects like Cape Canaveral - are inhibited, leaving the ground pretty barren.

Personally, I find most photo-real scenery disappointing - except, perhaps, Shawbury Fields, which is an area I know quite well and ES's scenery objects, whilst often not exactly correct, are extremely well placed and, therefore, convincing. So, No, I wouldn't go for MS or any other photo-real scenery, unless it came up to Shawbury Fields standard.

And, Yes - it is good to discuss negative views - we're all fairly laid back here. It's when things get personal and/or vindictive that we need to draw the line - so far, so good, eh? :thum:

Cheers - Dai. :cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dai as usual I value greatly your opinion, but in this case with florida it is not cape canaveral it is the basic colouring for me and the lack of good definition that is grim, I have miami aiport by tropical and the green trees there are green not turqoise, , however Unlike your goodself I prefer photoscenery because i mostly float around at 3000 feet or above, I also like ftx stuff, but prefer photoscenery, and have a great collection of most of Europe which is my main base of operations, however I did all my basic training in Florida and my first years of flying back in the 70's so know the region very well from the air and being a bit sentimental now in my old age thought it would be nice to get florida again as well as the Bahamas where i lived for 20 years, well like seatac you cannot imagine my disappointment when i saw what they had created, the florida keys are not much better than the stock fsx offereing , but it isnt the autogen that I am disappointed with it is the basic colours, it seems to have been filmed through a weird kind of filter that makes everything a hazey bluey grey colour which if anyone who has flown over florida will know is completely wrong. However it is also the attitude of the creators that gets my goat, they flamed me for having the temerity of promoting a free scenery which is miles better than the florida that I have , but when i wrote a nice letter suggesting that the colouring was a bit off and would that be corrected in a future version, I did not even get a reply, , some months ago when I was quite critical about ES at least they had the decency to open a dialogue with me and we came to a very satisfactory solution , hats off to them , but as I have said in more than one thread now all software should be try before you buy, If the creators have confidence in their product they would not force people to buy before trying it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your opinions.  There are some developers that allow you to try before you buy with demo's and/or limited areas. FTX does this which is what got me hooked on their top quality offerings and perhaps spoiled me for others.

I intend to write MSE support and tell them of my disappointment.  I am sure a refund is out of the question, but I do intend to let them know how unimpressed I am.

I buy scenery for the quality and attention to detail that  I can see at lower altitudes.  When I am flying a 767 at 35,000 ft I don't spend a whole lot of time staring out the window so scenery that can only be enjoyed like that is not for me.  Perhaps I did misunderstood what their product offered, and the blame is on me, but I don't really believe that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy my MSE California, Oregon, and washington ...Nevada is kinda meh. I feel MSE shines in mountain areas , not so much around cities. I find the lack of autogen and esp trees around airfields a huge dissapointment...I miss dodging around trees mostly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since you have it already Richard, maybe a good idea to check with the site and see if any settings can be changed to make the most of it. Then go for a flight cruising at 5000' in something a bit tamer than a rocket. :D  Might be salvageable. 

 

Me, I am waiting for ORBX/FTX to do the east coast of the US. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

In all fairness to MSE their newer products do seem to be much better detailed and better coloured however that doesnt excuse their lack of communication.

 

I was quite looking forward to their UK photoscenery and whether it would be better than gen x , however as it no longer looks forthcoming I suppose we shall have to wait for ES to produce their high def version. I wonder how long that will take?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Me, I am waiting for ORBX/FTX to do the east coast of the US. :)

 

I think your beard will be at least 7 foot by then..   :rofl:

 

 

.......You'll look like a member of ZZ Top before they ever hit the East coast.

 

That's it, I'm not shaving until they do. :D (I'll tell my better half it's a crusade to save the whales :)  )

Link to post
Share on other sites

looking at your pics, it seems to me that you can use some customized settings changes for PR

 

on my pc Florida's imagery is so clear; you can pickup lic plate numbers

you're clearly not enjoying your PR as you should

 

im not sure whats your rig setup; but here's a good baseline to start with in FSX.cfg

these tweaks are generally for PR; but are good all around

 

[bufferPools]
UsePools=1
PoolSize=8388608
RejectThreshold=253952
 

[Main]

FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.10 (this one has the biggest effect on PR)

 

in fsx display settings -> scenery tab

make sure your texture resolution is all the way to the right

 

 

in-light of the situation the next is not mandatory but well advised

its best that you sit down before you start the sim after these changes

and let the wife know; its ok if your screaming in the next few minutes, its not an emergency :P

 

 

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Chris.  I will try your suggestion.

 

Just to let everyone know, I have filled out a customer support ticket with MSE expressing my disappointment.  I'll let you know if anything comes of it and what their response is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

buffer pools has no effect on photoscenery clarity or colouring all it does is delay the amount of time the cpu holds the subject before passing it on to the gpu, so if you have a reasonable p.c. it is best to set bufferpools=0 then you get no lapse and better speed.

 

I am the first person that is willing to learn something new , therefore I tried the FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.10 setting again all this does is speed up the fraction of the cpu time given to the scenery loader in relation to the time spent rendering, consequently the closer to 0 the faster it will run , to a degree but then you can run into problems the lower you go. Again however this has nothing to do with picture clarity or colour, but I was willing to experiment a while to see if there were any differences between my stock setting of .22 and that proposed of .10.

I tried it both in the florida scenery and generation x south of england and I am darned if i can see any difference in the definition between the 2 settings the only thing I did notice, was that the bottom of my picture started to swim a bit  on the .10 setting which meant that something was getting pushed too hard. so I am leaving my p.c. at .22, it works for me.

Below you will see 4 photos which show my problem with the florida scenery and I am firly sure it is the same for seatac:

I have to point out that I also have miami airport by tropical sim , now they have bought the same scenery, but their colours are much better and sharper

in pic 1 you will see some panes with a natural green others more blurry and with a blue tint, the good colours are tropical sim

2014-3-15_15-28-11-963.png

again this pic is self explanatory

2014-3-15_15-28-43-492.png

lastly this pic shows clearly that they have used the same souce scenery but the megascenery seems to have a blueish filter between the ground and our point of view. if you look very closely the top two houses on the estate below are just out of the blue filter and are lovely and sharp  as are the warehouses  on the opposite side of the highway  but to the left megascenery strikes again

2014-3-15_15-49-22-762.png

 

there is nothing one can do to a p.c. that will make this correct, just as in digital photography if a pic is out of focus there is no way you can ever get it back into focus no matter what product you use.

 

I wait with baited breath to see if Richard gets any kind of an answer/offer cus i am next in line

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

buffer pools has no effect on photoscenery clarity or colouring all it does is delay the amount of time the cpu holds the subject before passing it on to the gpu, so if you have a reasonable p.c. it is best to set bufferpools=0 then you get no lapse and better speed.

Have to agree with Nigel.  I also tried what Chris suggested above, but made my viewing worse so deleted them back off.

 

I am not a fan of tweaks outside of FSX, so tend to keep my CFG to a minimum.

 

Any photoscenery will look terrible in FSX under 5000' and colour matching is again difficult when covering such a large area of say the USA or Europe.

 

The Mid-West to West coast of MSE is very acceptable as far as colour matching, but the east can be very mismatch.  I have learned to live with it as I much prefer it to bland FSX. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit james that i mostly believe in the kiss approach, and started off with a basic .cfg with just the usual half a dozen mods , but then i thought what the hell i will try the automatic venetubo mod and have to say it did improve things, and of course we were then presented with the blog of Kostas which pretty well accumulates all the info in one place from loads of people and i have incorporated most of those now , so I guess i can no longer attest to using the kiss system. But my system is working very well, no ctd's, no oom's , leaving me with the only decision to make when using ftx along with the ngx forcing me to reduce my LOD setting. However now I use DX10 about 95% of the time and that in itself makes the system much more less prone to ctd's or OOM's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI guys; i didn't realize this was still going on

your absolutely correct with your observation Nigel; first i'm sorry if i wasn't clear

 

buffer pools has nothing to do with PR clarity or colors; just instructions for sim that may help increase texture handling performance

 

id like to clarify my .10 suggestion should help render the terrain faster; thous pulling deeper imagery LOD's faster

there is a range; .10 is not the only param, default out the box is .33, the range goes .2 <> .33

 

the above settings needs to be matched and work well with "Texture Resolution" slider all the way to the right

as shown in the pic below (left side settings "terrain and water")

 

20080520_111507_FSX_settings_3.jpg

 

i see the houses clarity difference in the crossing area; this is how clear i see FL here; throughout!

im not sure why you're not getting deeper imagery

 

@jaydor

which GPU are you running with?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...