OlaHaldor Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 Look at these images of the KLAX scenery, said to be "one of the most detailed airports in X-Plane".I have my own thoughts obviously, but what's yours?Let's just say that if that's the quality you want, I'll be done with Honolulu in no time. Quote
simbabeat Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 The photo textures make me want to puke, but besides that the modeling is alright it seems. Quote
Kesomir Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 The buildings look alright, but could be better textured and the whole thing is let down by the ground photo textures. Not fond of that green. Reminds me of the early real scenery colouring. Ground could be cleaned up, removing shadowed objects, colours and resolution definately improved.Not the best advert for x-plane ever, and not up to msfs 2004 standards imho, but better than nothing. Quote
Kaphias Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 Yeesh.Yep, the photo textures ruin it. I believe photo textures are the best way to go if done correctly- the results I'm getting from my experiments with my local airport are amazing. Of course it's much easier to do photo textures when you have airport access... Quote
UH-60 Blackhawk Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 The objects are pretty well modeled, however I agree on the photo textures. What separates this from the Alberta HEMS is that the Alberta HEMS photo textures aren't forced, and the slight blur draws attention slightly away from the ground and to the buildings. Keep in mind I haven't flown in there for a while, unfortunately forgot about it, so I will come back with some screenshots to compare the ground textures soon. Quote
flyinhawaiian Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 Great concept... poor execution.Much like 95% of the products found on .org... Quote
eaglewing7 Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 Any idea as to who made this?From what I can see it is pretty substandard, especially for the $40 price tag that is technically associated with it. Quote
Kaphias Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 Any idea as to who made this?From what I can see it is pretty substandard, especially for the $40 price tag that is technically associated with it.99% sure it's "joyfulsongster".And from the store: "This is a $30 value for free" Quote
FlorianR Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 The best part of the scenery are the static aircraft :-\ Quote
YYZatcboy Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 Funny, because I was thinking about going and deleting all the static aircraft to improve FPS and open up gates for flying online. Quote
FlorianR Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 Funny, because I was thinking about going and deleting all the static aircraft to improve FPS and open up gates for flying online.Yes, but my comment was not meant to be compliment. I implied that the rest of the scenery looks awful. Quote
YYZatcboy Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 Better than anything else that's out for LAX, with the possible exception of some of Tom's old v.7 scenery. The lack of scenery for some of the worlds most major airports is pretty pathetic and is a big problem for x-plane. Sure MSFS conversions work ok, but I've always found that the best performance, especially for major airports comes from a native x-plane development. (Assuming all other things are equal like modelling quality and textures etc.) Quote
MaidenFan Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 So, this scenery isn't free to those who HAVE payed at least $40 in the past? It's only for future payments of at least $40.If so, that's lame. I have spent a ton of money there in the past... Quote
bokepacha Posted August 2, 2011 Report Posted August 2, 2011 I've just seen the same pictures as everyone so...Objects looks good to me, but low textures ruined the good part IMHO. Especially the textures of buildings Quote
Kaphias Posted August 3, 2011 Report Posted August 3, 2011 So, this scenery isn't free to those who HAVE payed at least $40 in the past? It's only for future payments of at least $40.If so, that's lame. I have spent a ton of money there in the past...Send Nicholas an e-mail or PM stating the products you have bought recently and see what he says. Quote
Oliver Posted August 3, 2011 Report Posted August 3, 2011 Better than anything else that's out for LAX, with the possible exception of some of Tom's old v.7 scenery. The lack of scenery for some of the worlds most major airports is pretty pathetic and is a big problem for x-plane. Sure MSFS conversions work ok, but I've always found that the best performance, especially for major airports comes from a native x-plane development. (Assuming all other things are equal like modelling quality and textures etc.)Cloud 9 KLAX works like a charm, great fps results as well. Quote
WombatBoy Posted August 3, 2011 Report Posted August 3, 2011 Oh yeah for sure! The Cloud 9 converted great, and I have every Blue Sky Scenery available for the surrounding area and I still get great FPS. Quote
dpny Posted August 3, 2011 Report Posted August 3, 2011 I have the Cloud 9, and I just got this. Can't see much between them.As an aside, I always hate ground textures. Quote
simbabeat Posted August 3, 2011 Report Posted August 3, 2011 I am ok with photo scenery but I think there comes a point where it is to much. Such as those vehicles in the screenshots. Quote
Warmbrak Posted August 3, 2011 Report Posted August 3, 2011 I would not willingly pay for this. Certainly a lot of effort went into this project, and I assume the frame-rates should be good. I am guessing that it looks a lot better from 5k feet up, but then there are the different coloring between the tiles that do not match up. As was said before, 3D modelling is good, let down by downright horrible textures in a lot of places. Not a good showcase of what X-Plane can do, and definitely not something that will get people to desert FSX/FS9 anytime soon.The vision for this scenery was probably good, but the execution not so much. It is salvageable with a serious rework of the textures. Ola, we are waiting for you to set the benchmark! Quote
FlyPod Posted August 3, 2011 Report Posted August 3, 2011 So, this scenery isn't free to those who HAVE payed at least $40 in the past? It's only for future payments of at least $40.If so, that's lame. I have spent a ton of money there in the past...Send Nicholas an e-mail or PM stating the products you have bought recently and see what he says.Yeah me too - ton of money in the past,and I mean a lot!......it would be a nice "thank you" to customers if past purchases counted....I wouldn't pay for it , not that much anyway... Quote
OlaHaldor Posted August 3, 2011 Author Report Posted August 3, 2011 I find it interesting that you like the 3D modeling. The tower and the arcs are way more detailed than anything else. All I see is boxes. So, flat boxes are OK? There could be a lot more done to them, but you're OK with it?If so, I'll just scrap a few layers of details and simplify a lot more. Quote
Kaphias Posted August 3, 2011 Report Posted August 3, 2011 I find it interesting that you like the 3D modeling. The tower and the arcs are way more detailed than anything else. All I see is boxes. So, flat boxes are OK? There could be a lot more done to them, but you're OK with it?If so, I'll just scrap a few layers of details and simplify a lot more.Well show us what ya got now first. ;D Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.