epiclolz Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 Okay Greetings everyone I am all new to fsx and so far I am enjoying my flight sim experience a lot . I am using rex essential plus with overdrive and with that I am able to get some nice textures with regards to those clouds sky and water . But I dont know why my aircraft , airport scenery are still not very realistic . Is there any other program I need to use for that ? I saw many videos in youtube where folks have those ultra realistice airport , bulidings , etc . Can someone please tell me how do they do it ? Like I said , my clouds and sky are very hd type - But.... see my aircraft it still has some issues right ? Thanks in advance..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 What you see in those youtube videos is a combination of: -Payware aircraft -Payware scenery -Payware addons -and some if not most videos are heavily edited to give the look of realism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScatterbrainKid Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 The clouds in your screenshot don't look so good to me! I've had default FSX Gold for about 8 years and it's so beautiful that I've never wanted to add anything except a strip of photoscenery and some addon planes..:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clutch Cargo Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 Welcome aboard! Yes, it is usually "add-ons" that turn a plain looking flightsim into a mini-masterpiece. There are literally 1,000's to choose from which keeps this hobby quite interesting. Some are payware and some are freeware. You just need to decide where to start, ha! Simmers tend to usually start off by wanting to see places that is familiar to them... fly in their own "backyard" sort-of-speak. I see you are in India so one could start off looking through the various flightsim sites in their library section and search for 'India' to see if stuff is available. Or explore places you always wanted to go in real life but have not or just something that catches your eye (like those YouTube videos), and try to mimic them. The fun thing is it's all up to you so have fun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abrussell Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 There are literally 1,000's to choose from which keeps this hobby quite interesting. Some are payware and some are freeware. You just need to decide where to start, ha! MSFS Gateway will give you an idea of what is out there. Bruce http://www.msfsgateway.com/scenery2.html [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]I5-2500k@ 4.5Ghz/ 16 GB Gskill DDR3 1600/Nvidia GTX460 1GB// CH Yoke/Pedals/Throttle/TrackIR/Win7/ Fsx Deluxe SP1 & SP2 "Don't let fear or good judgment hold you back" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epiclolz Posted October 16, 2015 Author Share Posted October 16, 2015 Thanks for your honest opinions , I am currently using rex essential plus with over drive . Can you tell me best payware addon for hd scenery and textures and yes I will browse through the link abrussell . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mallcott Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Thanks for your honest opinions , I am currently using rex essential plus with over drive . Can you tell me best payware addon for hd scenery and textures and yes I will browse through the link abrussell . Most video posters will list the addons in the supporting text. Go back to the videos you like and expand the discussion view panel. 9 times out of 10 you will find a list. As for your question, there simply is no such answer. It's for you to decide what YOU want and what works best on YOUR system for the type of simming YOU do. And by how strong your system is to support it. Start by defining your requirement more closely and someone may be able to help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScatterbrainKid Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 If you want 100% accurate scenery, Photoreal is the way to go because it's got every road, street, back alley, house, building and tree in its proper place, you'll even be able to see your own house. The only disadvantage is that most things are flat 2D as if they're painted on the ground, but if you're above about 1500 feet it's okay because they give the illusion of being 3D. You can buy a Treescapes program to add 3D trees to photoreal. Non-photoreal scenery may look prettier, but it's not 100% accurate as you'll notice some roads and buildings are missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W2DR Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Welcome to both the forum and the world of FSX. If you're ever looking for ground textures ORBX has two free time-unlimited scenery demos you may want to try. One is for the Olympic Peninsula in the state of Washington and the other is the entire island of Tasmania. Many of us think the ORBX scenery has the best ground textures available. The demos can be found on this page https://www.fullterrain.com/demos . (ORBX is fully compatible with REX as ORBX is ground textures only - no need to uninstall REX to try the demos.) Look around the ORBX website while you're there...it's fascinating stuff. Doug Intel 10700K @ 5.0 Ghz, Asus Maxumus XII Hero MB, Noctua NH-U12A Cooler, Corsair Vengence Pro 32GB 3200Mhz, Geforce RTX 2060 Super GPU, Cooler Master HAF 932 Tower, Thermaltake 1000W Toughpower PSU, Windows 10 Professional 64-Bit, and other good stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScatterbrainKid Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 To clarify, this sums up the difference between Photoreal and OrbX- "With Photoreal, you can easily navigate from A to B by following what you see below because everything is in its proper place. That's more difficult with OrbX as you're not seeing all the roads, just the main ones, and what might be a landmark to you (such as a pub on the corner in real life) will not necessarily be there with OrbX scenery." For example this is a screenshot of my FSX Tiger Moth over Henley-on-Thames using VFR GenX Southern England Photoreal scenery with the 3D Treescapes addon- http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/FSX-TMothb.gif Photoreal is so accurate that you could navigate hundreds of miles by eyeball alone, following roads, rivers, rail lines etc with a paper road map like this open on your desk- http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/FSX-henleyb.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Yes there are choices to make with addon scenery. If you like to fly at 1,500+ A.G.L., VFR with maps and charts, Photoreal is just the thing. However, if you fly low & slow & want more realistic scenery there, you'll probably prefer a program like ORBX. I find Photoreal is too flat for me. But then I STOL and hop over trees a lot. I found what I preferred by buying one piece of each type covering the same area. I flew one type first, then the other. Next session, I reversed the order. Either way, it's great! Enjoy! Being an old chopper guy I usually fly low and slow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mallcott Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Photoreal has massive limitations: 1: Single season, really set up for a limited period in that season. 2: Time delays in obtaining coverage can mean substantial textural difference 3: Difficult to place autogen over photoreal 4: Massive hard drive for the large file sizes 5: Doesn't relate well to the specific weather 6: Airports tend to stand out like a sore thumb There are other limitations. Whether this important to YOU is a matter of personal preference, not someone else shoving their personal preference down your throat. Like I said, take your time. Make your own decisions based on the flying that most appeals to you. I wouldn't add a single thing until I had at least 50 flying hours in the sim, and have already compiled a list of things I want to improve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScatterbrainKid Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 To further clarify things, I use VFR GenX Photoreal Scenery and the following 3 shots are from it- Firstly, it does give you hills like this (and as I said earlier I use the Treescapes addon prog to get 3D trees)- http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/sub2/FSX-Phot1_zpscpu2jq6b.jpg~original Secondly VFR GenX does give you some accurately-placed 3D buildings, for example here we see Westminster Abbey, Houses of Parliament, St. Pauls, Tower Bridge etc all accurately placed, and the Thames is a realistic muddy brown- http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/sub2/FSX-phot2_zpsshgng6ej.jpg~original And thirdly if you crank up the terrain density slider like this you also get lots of default FSX buildings (and airport buildings), they're not placed strictly accurately but provide nice eye candy- http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/sub2/FSX-phot3_zps6zkstqon.jpg~original Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mallcott Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 To further clarify things, I use VFR GenX Photoreal Scenery and the following 3 shots are from it- Firstly, it does give you hills like this (and as I said earlier I use the Treescapes addon prog to get 3D trees)- http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/sub2/FSX-Phot1_zpscpu2jq6b.jpg~original Secondly VFR GenX does give you some accurately-placed 3D buildings, for example here we see Westminster Abbey, Houses of Parliament, St. Pauls, Tower Bridge etc all accurately placed, and the Thames is a realistic muddy brown- http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/sub2/FSX-phot2_zpsshgng6ej.jpg~original And thirdly if you crank up the terrain density slider like this you also get lots of default FSX buildings (and airport buildings), they're not placed strictly accurately but provide nice eye candy- http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/sub2/FSX-phot3_zps6zkstqon.jpg~original As a denizen of London for much of my natural life, that looks absolutely nothing like the real city. Photorealism, my @rse. The river's not that brown, the city's not that green, and the plethora if buildings that bury the historic landmarks is not there at all. Waste of time and money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epiclolz Posted October 17, 2015 Author Share Posted October 17, 2015 I appreciate the time you guys took up for helping me out,. Thanks a lot , Have a great day ! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W2DR Posted October 17, 2015 Share Posted October 17, 2015 You're more than welcome. If you have more questions just ask. - Doug Intel 10700K @ 5.0 Ghz, Asus Maxumus XII Hero MB, Noctua NH-U12A Cooler, Corsair Vengence Pro 32GB 3200Mhz, Geforce RTX 2060 Super GPU, Cooler Master HAF 932 Tower, Thermaltake 1000W Toughpower PSU, Windows 10 Professional 64-Bit, and other good stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert Posted October 17, 2015 Share Posted October 17, 2015 As a denizen of London for much of my natural life, that looks absolutely nothing like the real city. Photorealism, my @rse. The river's not that brown, the city's not that green, and the plethora if buildings that bury the historic landmarks is not there at all. Waste of time and money. I love London! I try to stop there every time I cross the Atlantic. Being an old chopper jockey, I almost always sim fly Low & Slow. What in your opinion is the best low altitude depiction of London? I have the Mega Heathrow. But I don't have anything that does a good job with London City or the Isle of Dogs, etc. I love Scotflight's scenery. I'm hoping to find similar coverage for London. Being an old chopper guy I usually fly low and slow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScatterbrainKid Posted October 17, 2015 Share Posted October 17, 2015 As a denizen of London for much of my natural life, that looks absolutely nothing like the real city. Photorealism, my @rse. The river's not that brown, the city's not that green, and the plethora if buildings that bury the historic landmarks is not there at all. Waste of time and money. If you know any better London scenery, please let us know..:) Remember small screenshots don't do justice to the real fullscreen display, and if we don't like the colours we can simply tweak our monitor and/or vid card settings to suit ourself. Also, no scenery (whether it's photoreal or not) gives us a "plethora" of accurately-placed buildings, apart from the famous ones like Parliament etc in my screenshots. PS- if you let me know which part of London you live in, I'll screenshot it in photoreal so you can pick out your house..:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScatterbrainKid Posted October 17, 2015 Share Posted October 17, 2015 Photoreal has massive limitations... Can you recommend anything better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.