Simviation Forums

Damn it. fs9 looked terrible even with Ground Environment, Flight Environment and some RE Pro textures.  ::) Hopefully more addons will fix it more......

*Sigh*



And compared with fsX:



Ouch. Pitty fsX has blurries when I fly fast.  ::)

FS9 is not really suffering in that comparison, in fact it looks as good as FSX in that particular case.
However, I think you should play around in the FSX.cfg with the values MAX_TREES and MAX_BUIDINGS so that you could put your autogen density to the max, it really gives a better impression over those autogen-only parts of the town, thanks to the greater amount of small buildings.

[quote]Damn it. fs9 looked terrible even with Ground Environment, Flight Environment and some RE Pro textures.

FSX looks better. Way better. Just look at the less colourful autogen. Or the sky textures.

FSX looks better. Way better. Just look at the less colourful autogen. Or the sky textures.

And the mesh.
And the ground textures.
And the plane.
And lighting (fs9 looks like a CARTOON there)

Sigh...... I want more mods to fix this.  

I think if you got rid of overdone autogen and turned that back a bit and got some trees in there the fs9 would be exactly the same....  The plane is the exact same plane dunno if you noticed just the fsx plane has a better paint job which is easily fixed with the Carenado Cessna planes.

you can not argue the points that in those shots FS9 looks better. because FSX spanks it.
the auto gen is much better, much more detailed
the mesh looks better
the plane looks much better
the textrues are better
and the sky is better than the best FS9 addon!

I think blind freddy could see the difference there.

Oh and the autogen in that shot was actually significantly less dense than what fs9 was at.  ;)

[quote]Damn it. fs9 looked terrible even with Ground Environment, Flight Environment and some RE Pro textures.

I'd also noticed at least one of the clouds looked exactly the same... I assumed it was just similarities between the simulators causing that. However...

FSX looks better. Way better. Just look at the less colourful autogen. Or the sky textures.

And the mesh.
And the ground textures.
And the plane.
And lighting (fs9 looks like a CARTOON there)

Sigh...... I want more mods to fix this.  

Everything you mentioned there bar lighting can be altered in FS9, fine if you only use default, but personally FS9 runs much better on my machine, and I can tell you, from many of the pics I have seen, FSX running 'well' looks shoddy compared to FS9 with addons.

However your first shot of FS9 looks suspiciously unlike GEPro city textures. Did you have all of the said addons installed when you took this shot?  ::)

Alex

I don't know whether I should laugh or be shocked...?

How did you do that? How did you get exactly the same stuff at exactly the same time?

I donno.

Time was exactly the same (19:38, Spring). All I did was start at KSEA and then slew upwards with the weather theme 'fair weather', aligned Mt.Rainier to the left of the screen then took a picture.

The fs9 photo has Flight Environment textures, Ground environment textures, and some Real Environment pro textures. The fsX is stock apart from the sky textures and the landclass.

I can easily tell the diferance because:
1: That Cessna 172 is only in fsX unless you ported it to fs9 in which case most likely doesn't work.
2: Autogen, I have yet to see fs9 autogen look anything like FSX's.
3: Ground textures have a resolution of 1metre compared with fs9's blurry 4 metre.
4: Text is significantly smaller in fsX
5: Water textures are fsX

No I am not pulling your leg..... LOL!

Everything you mentioned there bar lighting can be altered in FS9,

Ground textures can't be as sharp as fsX..... ever. And if I alter fsX that's where fsX really pulls away. 10m mesh to the rescue.

I don't know whether I should laugh or be shocked...?

How did you do that? How did you get exactly the same stuff at exactly the same time?

I donno.

Time was exactly the same (19:38, Spring). All I did was start at KSEA and then slew upwards with the weather theme 'fair weather', aligned Mt.Rainier to the left of the screen then took a picture.

The fs9 photo has Flight Environment textures, Ground environment textures, and some Real Environment pro textures. The fsX is stock apart from the sky textures and the landclass.

I can easily tell the diferance because:
1: That Cessna 172 is only in fsX unless you ported it to fs9 in which case most likely doesn't work.
2: Autogen, I have yet to see fs9 autogen look anything like FSX's.
3: Ground textures have a resolution of 1metre compared with fs9's blurry 4 metre.
4: Text is significantly smaller in fsX
5: Water textures are fsX

No I am not pulling your leg..... LOL!

Okay mate, wasn't 'accusing' you of anything, just very surprised at the similarities. I don't have FSX, so I don't know all the differences, and, for example, your water textures are almost invisible, the Cessna could be a repaint etc....

What this basically means, I suppose, is that for the "fair weather" theme the clouds are not generated randomly, but the same cloud textures always start at the same position relative to the plane. FSX obviously uses the same code for this as FS9 (and why not) but with fluffy clouds.

You can get fluffy clouds like that in Flight Environment too, you just have to choose them. You can get the same hazy, syrupy atmosphere in FS9 too, using Real Env, FSAtmosphere, FE, ASG... so for me I really can't see that the second pic is clearly FSX at first sight. It's only the text which really tells me, now you point it out.

As I said in my original post, I can't see a big difference in these particular shots. Of course, go to the right place and FSX looks amazing and much better than FS9. Go to the wrong place and....  ;D


Anyway, don't like to be a pedant but your FS9 pic is, as you say, crammed full of payware, so this is moving to the payware forum, lol....  ;D

LOL no problem

And sorry for posting in the wrong forum. Whoops.