Simviation Forums

Seems like Manhatten New York Scenery in FS9 is Better then FSX. I have same settings in each.

Seems like Manhatten New York Scenery in FS9 is Better then FSX. I have same settings in each.

Are you running both versions without any scenery addons that doesn't affect New York? If you have New York scenery addons installed, take those out and then make a comparison. If you only have default scenery, then I guess you'll have to wait until someone improves the scenery with an addon. Besides, us addon developers are always gonna be one step ahead of Microsoft no matter how hard Microsoft tries to catch up.

Even if you have just the default sceneries in both FS9 and FSX, at the SAME settings, the FSX scenery will not give you the same performance.

Basically, the FSX scenery is much more "detailed"  (in the basic complexity of the underlying mesh) so that (the following is a philosophical comparison, not a detailed and factually accurate comparison) a "medium" setting in FSX would be a "high" setting in FS9...

In other words, you aren't comparing apples to apples here  

Let's not forget that FS9 has a detailed satilite image for the NY City area .
I find this preferable to the generic autogen and textures in FSX  even though they might be higher res.

FSX not having satilite images for major areas in is a step backwards IMO.

Joe D , I agree with you, It definately is a step backwards.

Far be it from me to question what anyones home town may look like in a simulation but I did not think they did a bad job

Nick, John and I are talking about the whole NY City area,  not just the island of Manhatten.
The NY City area contains many distinctice roadways, marshes etc that are sorely missing in the gerneric  FSX NYC area.

In FS9, the NYC area looked great with the salite pic even coupled with third party add ons like UT and BEV

The NYC area area is much, much more than a few high rise building on an island.


Sadly, there  are  other  major areas in FSX that suffered the same fate with the absense of satalite pics that were present in FS9.

[quote]Nick, John and I are talking about the whole NY City area,

Far be it from me to question what anyones home town may look like in a simulation but I did not think they did a bad job

The Difference is that not everyone has a high def computer and that we cant all play it like that. My point is that FS9 had great scenery for NYC and even other cities but in FSX, the default is far from even looking like the city. (IT HAS FRKIN THREE BUIDLINGS IN FSX USING THE DEFAULT SCENERY IN NYC!!!!!!)

[quote]Nick, John and I are talking about the whole NY City area,

Also there is a road ,going across the East River where it should not be. Its going from Brooklyn to lower MANHATTEN. Check it out with Google Earth for Comparison.

If NY is one of the 'High Details' cities of FS9, then it has a separate directory in the scenery folder of FS9.
Maybe you cloud try to import and declare that scenery in FSX and post the results here ?

I think this forum needs a new section. Let's call it,  "Ways that FS9 is better than FSX"..  because the the effort put forth to come up with them is becoming a creativite art form, worthy of it's own section.


I think that would also keep people from going to the FS2004 section and posting about why they no longer run it.    ::)