cobalt

What is so wrong with getting 50 FPS?

Absolutely nothing, unless you have an FPS-obsession! The current performance of MSFS, after SU11, is so good that I hardly even think about FPS any more. Many simmers run it locked at 30 FPS and have ultra-smooth performance. The whole topic of FPS may be gradually fading away, two years into MSFS.

Daspinall, I may be telling you what you already know, but just in case, let me summarize. When I go to Content Manager and select "Installed" (click the box in upper left corner), and then search for photogrammetry using the search function, it finds 10 "3D Photogrammetry Cities" areas, from Australia to USA (listed alphabetically). You can select any or all of these to delete if you wish; they can be reinstalled at any time. Independently of these, the Photogrammetry option available in General Options > Data can be on or off; if it's off, then all photogrammetry of the areas listed in Content Manager will be turned off.

Separate and apart from these photogrammetry areas in Content Manager, are photogrammetry add-ons for many cities around the world available as freeware from flightsim.to (many of them surprisingly small, e.g. Durham NC). When these are placed in Community, their photogrammetry will be visible regardless of your setting in General Options. Hope this helps clarify.

First, welcome back to flight-simming. A lot has changed in the hobby with the introduction of MSFS 2020 two years ago, and it has become a far more immersive, amazing experience than it ever was before (spoken as a user of many earlier sims from FS2 through FSX). But MSFS is not for everyone, and there are several things that need to be understood before you take the plunge. It uses satellite-based streamed real-world imagery to access the entire planet, which requires a good and reliable internet connection with decent bandwidth. Since most scenery is accessed only as needed depending on where you are flying, very little of it is actually stored in your computer at any moment, in contrast to earlier sims (real-world scenery for the whole planet would require hundreds of terabytes, impossible to accommodate on any PC). Therefore, it doesn't matter where you plan to fly, as far as storage on your hard drive is concerned.

Secondly, realize that MSFS is a work in progress, a 10-year project with 8 years remaining, and there are frequent mandatory updates that must be installed. On occasion these can be a pain.

Third, in large part because of these constant updates, and the fact that everyone's system is different, there will almost inevitably be glitches to overcome from time to time, so patience is required, though individual experiences vary widely. As is true for all sims, the negative posts tend to be over-represented on the forums. But notwithstanding some problems, I personally find MSFS to be beyond anything I could have ever imagined. The sensation of flying over the real world with everything accurately placed, and in real weather, is indescribable! While as I said, this sim is not for everyone (especially if you are looking for something perfect "out of the box"), I think you are likely to be pleased, and Alaska will look more real than you have ever seen it in a flight simulator.

As for purchasing from Steam vs, the MS store, you will get different opinions on this. I did it though MS store with no problems, but my impression from the forums is that Steam may be the safest course.

Good luck!

I concur with everything that's been said, and will add that MSFS is not just a better simulator than everything that preceded it (and I was a great fan of FSX for 15 years); it offers an entirely new experience in fight simming that allows you to explore the world in detail with an unprecedented level of realism and sense of immersion. And it is getting better all the time. Also there is an abundance of excellent add-ons available for MSFS, many of them freeware.

A couple of caveats. You need a decent internet connection, required for streaming of satellite data, and you need to recognize that this is not a finished product, but a work in progress which entails frequent mandatory updates. You also need patience, because there will be glitches from time to time that need to be dealt with. But the rewards are great. Come aboard and your simming life will never be the same!

Im ok with the melting because with photogrammerty off, it looks like FS9.

You can't be serious.

Great name, just a different spelling

1 Yes, it really is that good. No complaints at all from me. I gave up after FS9 as my old pc could not run FSX at all. With that being said, from 1500ft, it looks great, but getting down in some areas, the textures bleed and it looks like buildings are melting. Flying into airports, you do not notice it. Its only when flying really low and in a city setting.

 

Just to point out that the "melting" of buildings near the ground is seen only in photogrammetry areas, which are all urban. Turn off photogrammetry, and there is no melting at all.

For all the reasons you all are mentioning, FSX is looking like my final sweet spot in the hobby. Nothing against P3D, X-Plane, or even MSFS, but there is something magical to me about FSX that the others are missing. For whatever reason, my niche in the sim is mostly the world of commercial aviation, circa the 90s and early 2000s. I like to see the aircraft/airlines/airports represented in a sim as they were then. Hah, again everyone, COMPLETELY subjective here ;) I also like a sim to leave at least a slight delineation between the real world and sim world. That blurring really accelerates with P3D, more so with X-Plane, and is officially gone with MSFS. It's understandably inevitable in the progression of the hobby......so be it. But despite the technological achievement, it's meh for me. Even with allllllllll the scenery addons, FSX still manages to look like a cartoon...................but at an amazing level of detail. So cool.

This is the single most fascinating statement I've seen in any flightsim forum.

My bridges in New York are all solid objects now. With or without the Samscene NY add on. I do hope a fix comes out soon for this.

There are free add-ons for most of the NYC bridges on flightsim.to.

At most airfields or airports there are, in MSFS, some form of buildings, but these are not replicas of the buildings that actually exist there in real life. Go to Rockcliffe and look at the clubhouse, for instance. Then look at the screenshots of my Rockcliffe post for FS9. If you are happy with what you have then fine, everyone can have their own opinion.

The difference with MSFS, in comparison to all earlier sims, is that the satellite imagery places all buildings in the correct position with the correct footprint and height. Thus cities, neighborhoods, and streets appear as they should (albeit with textures that may not be accurate). This is novel, ground-breaking, and allows real-world navigation -- not possible before.

Imagine someone trying to set up a screen shot featuring something on the ground, like a landmark building.

Why wouldn't you just pause the sim to do that?

. A well polished product won't have so many needed updates. Only those required to fix minor errors found along the way and security issues. And they shouldn't need to be ~15GB a piece!

Two points. MSFS was announced on its release as a 10-year project that would be updated on a regular basis; it was not issued as a "well polished product". Second, the typical net size of an update is only 2 to 4 GB, since most update files override existing files.