UTX V2 or FTX Global or both??

Gents:

 

If you haven't figured out already, I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer....

 

I think I am going to purchase FTX Global, but if I do, should I purchase UTX V2 as well or is it not necessary?

 

Thanks,

 

Dave

UTX V2 complements the base FTX product - but is pointless to spend the money on UTX and FTX Global Vector. At least until FTX US Landclass comes out UTX has something not found in FTX, but UTX is ONLY covering the USA at present. Global and Vector covers the whole World.

 

Personally I can't see the point - UTX is too little too late. YMMV if you have unlimited funds to throw at duplicating the globe, or only fly in areas covered by UTX and NOT covered by FTX NA Regions,, which are superior to UTX USA in almost every aspect.

 

The argument can be revisited after OpenLC USA is released by FTX.

This topic

http://www.simforums.com/forums/utx-v20-prepar3d-ftx-global-combo_topic50749.html

clearly indicates a fundamental mismatch between Global and UTX, rendering them unsuitable got combination use.

 

The developer goes to great pains to explain how this happens, and no pain at all indicating how they intend to fix it (or not).

 

Use Global for textures and it looks like your wasting your money on UTX v2 for the USA, at least. The big unknown remains OpenLC for NA.

Baloney! The problem is exactly the SAME with Vector.

 

UTX2 is just as compatible with Global as Vector and is more accurate data. I have both Global and Vector and I have UTX2 and they work perfectly together. You just have to pay attention to the order in the scenery library.

 

UTX covers the US and Vector covers the rest. As UTX releases new areas, I will continue to use them if they are consistently better than Vector.

 

IMHO, right now, Vector is a mess.

 

If you don't fly in the US much, UTX would probably be of no benefit but if you do, it's an improvement.

 

Vic

Actually not baloney. At all.

 

The NA Regions are specifically written to accommodate a verifiable facsimile of the road networks, including hand annotated placement of autogen to suit (objects adapted to the roads) while Vector has selectable options specifically to suit the roads with Global textures (roads adapted to the objects).

 

In other words, they are designed to work together.

 

UTX claims no such compatibility and then explains why it can't happen. Curious.

 

Potentially, the accuracy of FTX NA Regions might accommodate UTX better, and they did talk about 'seamless working with UTX' in the literature, but I haven't seen anything about v2. And FTX NA is not Global, which is what the question was about.

 

Thank you for confirming what I said. Vector is not a mess, but as part of the triumvirate of Global/Vector and Landclass the USA is unfinished. Everywhere else it's a massive improvement. And it is the 'everywhere else that there are no comparisons for UTX, because it is unfinished everywhere except the USA.

Let's agree to disagree. I think Vector is a mess and you do not. I see the road anomalies with both and you do not.

 

Let's let the folks who want to try either form THEIR opinions, not parrot ours.

 

As UTX releases new areas, each will be compared to Vector and found to be better or found lacking. Considering the errors and problems with Vector, I hope for the former.

 

Vic

I see no issues with Vector in the areas in which I fly. Those areas are global, but not the USA.

 

However, the FTX Vector configuration utility should be used to optimise the experience - for example by having ONLY the major roads active and either of the secondary or tertiary roads and features - NOT both. That alone removes more than 90% of any potential conflict, as well as resolving FPS issues that some have reported with higher ground traffic levels.

 

But in the USA the Global/Vector proposition is lacking the dedicated OpenLC landclass that optimises and ties together the Global textures and the Vector graphics. UTX USA v2 doesn't do this either, nor do the developers intend to.

 

OpenLC NA will do so, so on that basis I'd say UTX USAv2 is too little, too late. Use it ith GEX and starta dofferet path, but the mix'n'match approach will NOT work. Just bear in mind the dozens of addon US airports that require FTX Global or are built for the FTX NA Regional products.

 

Clearly the developers accept that as they themselves are moving toward their more specific Xtreme Cities product range, which just happens to closely replicate the FTX NA Region solution.

 

And if we want to see others opinions not parrot ours, where ARE those contributions? This is practically a dead forum. At the very least you'd think the developers or publishers would have either posted here, or referenced it in their own discussion groups.

As if by magic, a comparison appears

http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/88826-ftx-nor-vs-ftx-globalvectoropenlc-eu-a-comparison/

 

OK, it's for the new Norway, but what it does do is clearly demonstrate that Global + Vector + OpenLC comes close, but does not match a Region-specific addon.

 

It follows that for the USA, where FTX has yet to release the OpenLC element, whatever you see with Global + UTX is going to be a shortfall compared to the combined efforts. So I'd be wary of comparisons before OpenLC USA is released.

 

And they still won't match what the Regional NA products deliver.

 

Alles Klar?

Our OPINIONS differ.

 

Alles Klar?

Has anyone tried fsx global/vector and scenerytech north america landclass together and if so, does it offer any improvement?

Has anyone tried fsx global/vector and scenerytech north america landclass together and if so, does it offer any improvement?

 

Yes

No

Yes

No

 

ROFL! You sure don't mince words!

 

Vic

Thanks.