My take on LOWI

  • Hey guys, did a lot of video over the years with mostly FSX, a lot on ORBX that ended up on their product page.


    Now I'm sold to Aerofly :o
    Ben


    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    BennyBoy. I5 8600K @ 4,3ghz, 16 ram, GTX 1060 6G @ UW @2560 X 1080. Sim: AF2 & P3D V4

  • Just had chance to try LOWI this afternoon, and my first impressions are a bit mixed. Over 800ft or so and it does look lovely, but if you drop below that, I'm finding that the photo scenery layer underneath in the broader valley area is surprisingly low res. The pixels are very visible and blocky. The area within the airport is very impressive though, and there is lots going on if you taxi around where you probably shouldn't to get a better view.


    I didn't feel that the surrounding valley stood up that well though against say homemade Ortho4XP XP11 scenery, but the buildings variety and placement was really good. I'd like to see a higher res option for the base photo layer, I don't feel it quite matches the quality of the 3D parts personally.

    i7-7700K/Gigabyte RTX2080/Win10 64bit/32Gb RAM/Asus Xonar DX+ Beyer DT990 pro headphones/LG 34" UM65 @2560x1080/Rift CV1/TM Warthog+VKB MkIV Rudder pedals

  • Ben.


    Congratulations on a beautiful video, it really is outstanding and lovely music choice too. Unfotunately many a nice video have been let down because of there music, not in this case however.


    John, I suppose it's best to say we agree on being different as to our account of LOWI. Frankly I thought it close to perfection and are just so impressed with it. That's just my take on it.


    All the best,


    Taranakian (Jim)


    PS: I am either getting forgetful or tired. I have changed the names to the right person now, whata mistaka to maka :cool:

    Computer: PB Gaming 62000 Skylake Core i5 6600, Quad Core 3.3Ghz with Premium Cooling, 16GB DDR4 Gaming Ram, 250GB SSD, 2TB HHD, N'VIDEA GTX 1070 8GB GDDR5, DIRECTX12 Gaming Graphic's Card, VR Ready, Windows10 Home Edition, 64bit, 2 x 24" Widescreen HDMI 1080p VDU's

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Amateur Radio Station: ZL2BMH

    Edited once, last by Taranakian ().

  • Hi Jim, Yes, I was just sharing a point of view for discussion really, don't get me wrong it's a very impressive piece of work and I appreciate the skill and effort that goes into these things. I was trying to present a relatively objective view though regarding the pixel size of the underlying photo scenery. Now that might be for performance/memory reasons, who knows, but if you compare what you can make yourself in XP11 to the Innsbruck valley wider area, and how it looks at 300ft, then I think it's worth discussing at least. One of the reasons for an early access release is to get feedback, and to make sure that Af2 stands up well or better against its contemporaries.


    My comments are meant in terms of hopefully constructive feedback, certainly not criticism, so a suggestion to allow an option for the base photo layer to be higher resolution is something I think could improve an already impressive product.


    Oh, by the way, the Opening Post video was from Ben there, and yes, it's a lovely piece of work, (nice one Ben) credit where it's due :rolleyes:


    Edit: what is striking is the framerate that FS2 maintains with that level of quality; if you compare it to current/last gen sims, then performance at well over 100fps is very impressive and perfect for VR.

    i7-7700K/Gigabyte RTX2080/Win10 64bit/32Gb RAM/Asus Xonar DX+ Beyer DT990 pro headphones/LG 34" UM65 @2560x1080/Rift CV1/TM Warthog+VKB MkIV Rudder pedals


  • My comments are meant in terms of hopefully constructive feedback, certainly not criticism, so a suggestion to allow an option for the base photo layer to be higher resolution is something I think could improve an already impressive product.


    Agreed. Orbx is planning on making photoreal regions: if the quality of the textures in those regions is at the same level as the (outer) parts of LOWI you mentioned, I wouldn't like it... I read similar feedback about the Chicago area outside of the airport/city. Having 12000 km2 of photoreal textures sounds nice but when it is that low res you might as well skip it. I presume one of the reasons they chose these lower res textures is the size of them. Hopefully this all has to do with 'early access' and so on. I have to add that at a regular flying altitude things aren't too bad as long as there is enough autogen covering the textures.

  • Definitely, anything above about 800ft or so is fine, so you can kind of see what they were aiming at. The ironic thing is, as the detail in the buildings and environment get better, you want to come and have a closer look, which is when you start to pick up those jaggy pixels.

    i7-7700K/Gigabyte RTX2080/Win10 64bit/32Gb RAM/Asus Xonar DX+ Beyer DT990 pro headphones/LG 34" UM65 @2560x1080/Rift CV1/TM Warthog+VKB MkIV Rudder pedals