The two sceneries are not related except for location; they cover the same geography but are not the same kind of scenery. Activate one or the other; you do not need to delete VFR in order to install Orbx and Orbx won't install in VFR foleders anyway. I switch between them depending on what I want to see. Orbx scenery is the same KIND as default (has autogen); VFR is photographic - generally does not have autogen.
Hooked since FS4... now flying: FSX Acceleration on Win7/64, Core Duo E8400; GA-EP45-DS3R; GTX 460-768MB; 4G RAM; Freezer 7 Pro
in the assembly stage and rarin' to go...
self-built i7 4790 at 4 GHz; GA-Z97X mobo; GTX 970; 8GB gskill; 840 EVO OS; 840 EVO game drive; Win 7/64
... if it don't 'fly' then there's always Tiddlywinks...
Just make sure and disable one or the other in the scenery library to avoid unforeseen conflicts...
That said, i'll be removing the photoscenery - it never really did it for me....
I tried the Orbx UK but autogen doesn't do it for me, in any form, so I am sticking with the Playsims scenery.
I find it surprisingly accurate and realistic, particularly when the treescapes are used, with 3d objects.
We all have different criteria as to what makes a flight feel immersive and "real", and that is what does it for me.
England is different completely, in real life, to the other continents. Very populated and complicated infrastucture. The autogen of large, orange tiled houses everywhere is just not realistic. I only recognised the village where I live by the nearby water features (mis-shapen) and there were 2 factories where houses are supposed to be. Horizon Gen X is an ever pleasing wonder to fly around by comparison, especially with Treescapes. The coastlines in OrbX England are unrealistic as well with cliff and estuary features missing and houses at 45 degrees on cliffsides.
OrbX need to look again at this product as it is, in my view, an almost cartoon misrepresentation of England. It may damage their reputation.
Don't be fooled and, go with the flow, of thinking this must be great because Pacific NW was great. Look at it it carefully especially in areas you are familiar with.
It's most definitely Horizon products for me.
I've wasted £28 on Orb X England and will deactivate it until I hear of a big patch.
Please see my post above before you do anything mistaken like deleting VFR. You don't need to anyway for Orb X England to work. Just deactivate VFR in settings, scenery library. Then compare the two while "pausing" in flight. Just go to scenery library while paused and reactivate VFR.
The difference is stark. Horizon VFR is far superior unless you are flying at 30,000 feet then the scenery doesn't matter.
Don't mistakenly delete Horizon VFR. You only need to de-activate it in "settings" "scenery library".
Then "pause" in flight, go to "scenery library" on the toolbar and re-activate VFR.
The comparison will be a shock, I guarantee,
It's Horizon for me.
I hail from the PNW. Orbx scenery is certainly great but just like England there are all sorts of things that do not line up or are off from reality. This is just the same as England. It's just a game and this is just game scenery.
What I am noticing is folks from England are being very critical of this scenery based upon local knowledge that something is off here and their.
I do believe that PNW is the most accurate and best represented by comparison.
I think that the new folks out of the England office need to and will learn a few more tricks of the trade to improve their work. I also see that they are promising to put out a SP1 shortly to deal with many broader and specific issues that have arisen. PNW has had 5, FIVE, SP's.
Orbx can't tolerate a failure with England as it's the doorway to Europe so they will go the long mile toward "fixing" and enhancing this product to better suit the needs of us users...I don't doubt it one minute.
I would suggest those who have it keep posting their wishes on their forums in a constructive way and you will be rewarded. Remember that the largest Orbx fanbase exists in England so I think that this will play out in a way the Orbx will want to ensure it keeps its clients happy.
Let's hope so.
England is so small by comparison with Canada, USA and Australia that, if one loves the countryside, in 20 years, every coastal path can be walked and the views and seaside villages and towns committed to memory and compared with Orb X England. The other areas covered are huge and relatively unpopulated so the forests, mountains and rivers look wonderful and, I suspect are really only known in detail by very few hardy exploring souls .
For me, OrbX need to go more down the "photorealistic" route in Britain due to the huge number of villages and towns that dot the landscape- every one with a potential OrbX customer who will know the area like the back of his hand.
I want the project to succeed. It needs a different approach though IMO.
Last edited by SCAMP; 11-22-2012 at 04:21 PM.
yes I see the issue with precision as you mention - population, developed, well known to locals - I picked this up from folks comments and thought exactly as you said, I suspect that it's not going to happen the way some might expect. They just can't do this type of scenery and make it so precise as that and still make money.
I guess that's what photo real scenery if properly annotated would give users. Some of its out there already.
I do follow my flights along in google earth and notice that things are not placed spot on but for me i don't care much. I do care about larger visual reference points, especially when VFR flying. There is an absence of certain things that needs to be "spiffed" up as well...such as I mentioned about missing gravel "aggragates" pits.
FYI in my local area here on Vancouver Island, there are three golf courses (that I play at) and all were missing from PNW. I posted a note about this because they are visual reference points which in my opinion should have been included. And, sure enough patch #1, they put them into the scenery. So I would keep bringing stuff up and see what transpires.