FTX Global patterns - HELP

[OldAirmail]

I went for a flight from Omaha, Nebraska (KOMA) to Denver International Airport, Colorado (KDEN).

I wanted to see the "amber waves of grain", courtesy of FTX Global.


Unfortunately, THIS is what I saw from apx 30,000 feet.





Although forests have some repetitions, there're harder to spot. Mountains have no repetitions, as would be expected.

There must be some setting that I have wrong.

[OldAirmail]

This one's closer to the ground in France.

[OldAirmail]

I don't know why, but sometimes posts don't hang around very long.

The first post was made at 8:30 pm (my time of course) and was gone from the "View new posts" about half an hour later when I went to post another picture of patterns in FTX Global.



I don't remember seeing anything like these repetitions before.

I did apply the FTX Global Patch 1.10.

Has anyone noticed the lack of pattern before the patch, and the presence of repetitions after the patch?

[OldAirmail]

Has anyone else tried the FTX Global Patch 1.10?

Check for repartitions before you do, and let us know if they appear after the update.

[vuk1]

I think as simmers expectation and wish is to have real texture of the terrain. Me included . The only answer to that is something like goggle earth. Unfortunately nobody is able to do that .I hope one day?????FTX Global at the moment is paying more attention to populated area and it is batter when you flight is over town and city . We wait. However combination of P3D and FTX is the improvement in my humble opinion .

[OldAirmail]

I uninstalled FTX Global (again). Their uninstaller is so incredibly fast as to be unbelievable.

One of the airports that I fly out of often has limited built-in FSX buildings, so I checked that to make sure that FTX-G was uninstalled. It showed the FSX set of buildings.

When I started up FSX I went back to the Great Planes. And up high.

Same patterns. EXACT same patterns.



So what do we have here. (that's a rhetorical question, so no question mark needed)

If I have the EXAXT same ground pattern after uninstalling FTX Global as I do with FTX Global installed, then something is wrong.

I suspect that the FTX uninstall isn't a complete uninstall. But as the only way to find out would be to uninstall FSX one more time, I'm going to let it ride.



FTX Global and its' update have been reinstalled. I will probably never fly across the heartland again so it's ultimately unimportant to me.

I guess that Orbx had higher priorities than making that region look good. And I also suspect that there are many more large plains areas across the earth that are similarly neglected.



BTW - If you haven't installed the UPDATE go ahead and do so. Just having the red and green lights at the intersections is worth it.

A minor point. Orbx has improved the night streetlights, but they are nowhere near as good as the latest X-Plane streetlights. On the other hand, it's a hundred percent better than FSX (as best as I can recall)..

[Fozzer]

Sometimes I am very wary of installing "updates" in case they cause problems which didn't exist before.... ....

I am still running the original version 1.0 on my ORBX FTX Global, and as I have little or no interest in night flying and its ground lighting effects, is there any advantage in installing version 1.10?
The only slight advantage for me would seem to be to improve slightly the texture colours of the deserts in Southern California/Nevada... ...!

Is it worth the effort (and risk) of installing version 1.10?

Paul.... ...!

[OldAirmail]

If the desert scenery is not a problem for you, then no.


Like you, I haven't flown much at night.

Except for when I want the challenge of using instruments on a dark and stormy night. I always love that first site of the airport below the clouds.

It is nice to see the taillights of cars on the roads at night, along with the traffic lights.


As to whether or not FTX Global or its' update is to blame for the patterns, I don't know. They may be the result of the original FSX landclass.


The update is FAR LARGER than I would think that it needs to be for the trivial improvements they claim. So there may be more improvements than they want to own up to.