What's your take on the KLAX scenery?

[OlaHaldor]

Have you seen my scenery threads?

[Kaphias]

Have you seen my scenery threads?

Nothing on Honolulu, no. What work I have seen of yours is truly inspiring to those of us just getting started.

[OlaHaldor]

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm by no means the best out there. Heck, I haven't even released a damn airport yet. Because I'm a perfectionist I guess.. I'm still fiddling with the airports I've started, but the lack of reference photos puts me on a hold. But what I've got so far kicks this product way down in the boots if you ask me.

[Kesomir]

An unreleased product is as much use as no product.

As I said, I think the 3d modelling is alright (mostly based on the arcs). Sure there could be more detail, but it's much better than the texturing which is the achilles heel.

You can get away with less detail in places if the texturing is top notch. Amazingly detailed but 2 fps is not as good as slightly less detailed, good textures and good frames, although I understand you can get away with a lot of objects anyway.

I would pay for a good performance high detail airport though, should the price be right.

If I remember correctly Ola, your texturing is pretty good. Just pick and finish something. I'm sure there's a market for oahu (bigger than the backwater stuff).

Just remember that with xp10 there will be competition with the default airport scenery which looks pretty good.

[Warmbrak]

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.

Hi Ola,

You ask a very good question, and I am going to use a term that Austin uses at times with scenery - Plausibility. I love your development threads and look forward to see which boundary you will be pushing next. I find airports such as EHSB to be brilliant, however it does take it toll on performance. If I can refer to the FSX OrbX FTX packages - their scenery looks great, but even on high-end machines they will bring on the choppy frames. Some of the details are nice to see the first time round, but after that it becomes an airport again, and those features keep adding to the overheads.

As with any 3D model made for a game, there needs to be a balance between the modelling and the texturing, and in most cases detail may need to be sacrificed in either one or both. The 3D buildings in the KLAX scenery is basic but very functional, and would be more than sufficient with decent texturing. Using flat texturing however as a substitute for airport "furniture" or tarmac results in a failure for this package. I have seen great 3D detail packages such as Cormac's brilliant Cork that performs very well, and the texturing is nicely done, striking a very good balance. I enjoy Tom Curtis' scenery as well, and his airports have reasonable modelling and texturing that comes together well, and is very user friendly.

At the end of the day, you are the one that will have to be satisfied with your own efforts, and from I have seen in your development shots, most of us will be too!

[steven winslow]

Over the past 11 months I have spent over $1100 at the org......planes, scenery and all my Saitek gear.  I bought the Challenger on July 25th and have no intention of buying any other aircraft from the org at this time.  So I wrote to Nicolas, not because I really wanted the KLAX scenery (I have some that I'm perfectly happy with) but because I think I deserve to have the scenery because of my previous patronage of the org.  He agreed and sent me the link!  I'll take a look at the scenery, but I don't imagine I'll keep it installed, based on the screenshots I've seen.  I'll let you know what I think once I take a look at it.

[joyfulsongster]

Thank you all for your kind comments regarding my KLAX scenery. It is nice to be reviewed by people who understand the limitations of the technology we have and what compromises have to be wrestled with in order to produce something that looks as best as it can and still be flyable. When I built the KSLC scenery and filled it with objects, many people complained because they couldn't run it. KLAX is a bit larger and in a densely populated area that have textures that greatly hit the FPS, so, I added as much detail as I could get away with on medium fast pc.

The scenery looks best on extreme res from at least 400' above ground. I suggest that you get in the Bell 206 and fly around for a while. I have not seen any non-ortho textured airports that can compare. The technology is not available to us for ground level resolution, unless you have access to the airport. And if it were, we still don't have the technology to satisfactorily reproduce such a high amount of information, for such a large airport, in such a detailed area. (Sidenote: Even all statics look awful, when one gets close enough to them, not to mention most all the default X-Plane ground textures, etc., etc. So it's really a matter of what is accepted and what is not.)

Bear in mind, that at present, all the other airports in the area are also loaded at the same time and you will begin to see that it was a small miracle that I was able to get away with making it as detailed as it is.

For those not happy with my scenery I would like to suggest you try this one: http://x-plane.org/home/tdavis/scenery8/Los_Angeles.zip

Also, it is not correct to say the scenery cost $30. The scenery is a free bonus for anyone purchasing $40 or more.

Being disabled, I was happy to discover X-Plane and find a way to contribute to making it better, at least in some small way. I appreciate all the understanding and encouraging comments that inspire me to keep going and do better.

Jeff Mueller

[GrahamH]

The photo textures on the ground look marvelous from very far away, but when you get in close, it makes me cringe. I guess overall, it's the best x-plane original scenery out there for LAX.

[dpny]

The photo textures on the ground look marvelous from very far away, but when you get in close, it makes me cringe. I guess overall, it's the best x-plane original scenery out there for LAX.

That's all photo sceneries for me, which is why I don't like photo scenery.

[paulyg]

I wouldn't pay that much for scenery- I bought KPAE which is pretty nice, though it hits hard on FPS for me. I don't really like the photo-textures on the buildings that much.

Edited September 20, 2011 by paulyg

[GrahamH]

That's all photo sceneries for me, which is why I don't like photo scenery.

You're right. If only there was a way to make phono sceneries look crisp, even when you are really close, because I do not like textureless, ugly grass beside the taxiways, runways, ect.

Some day.

Edited September 22, 2011 by Graham H