General Category > General Discussion
KJFK Review on avsim.com - Dispraise?
RobertW:
Thanks for all your comments with regards to Colin's review as posted at AVSIM.
It is unfortunate that his questions to the developer appear to have gotten lost in the ethernet.
Colin has assured us (as posted in this thread) that he will make an amendment to his review comments.
It was apparent throughout the review that he did like this product, and as a reviewer, called the experience as he saw it.
I appreciate all the help you have afforded him in helping to get his PC settings corrected to give him the best graphical experience possible at JFK.
As soon as Colin has sent me his updated review comments, I'll get the review amended accordingly.
BTW - this is the way forums are supposed to work.....simmers working together for the greater good of the hobby ;D
Robert Whitwell
Reviews Editor
avsim.com
mave128:
hey folks,
i understand colin very well when he says that the taxiways look really blurry.
it is fact, and there ain´t no doubt, that in comparisson with kord the ground texture look, let me say
different.
collin pointed this out, and he is right.
to make clear the problem just take a look into this topic:
http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=967.15
there you will find the answer why fsdt decided to do it this way.
in my opinion the majority of ground textures in the very near don´t look very well.
but if u look at the airport from a higher point of view, the whole scenry looks just amazing!!!
unfortunately fsdt had to make this compromise in order to get this huge mass of different ground colors handeled.
best wishes,
sören
virtuali:
--- Quote from: mave128 on November 17, 2008, 01:19:37 am ---i understand colin very well when he says that the taxiways look really blurry.
--- End quote ---
No. They don't look nearly as blurred as in HIS screenshot. Clear proof: look at the SAME area, in Ray's screenshots. So, it's obviously a problem on Colin's PC settings, that is not displaying the full resolution of the scenery.
--- Quote ---it is fact, and there ain´t no doubt, that in comparisson with kord the ground texture look, let me say different.
--- End quote ---
That's only an optical illusion created by the fact that the concrete can be faked more easily than asphalt, because the detail texture for concrete can be made more recognizable, and it can mask the otherwise lower resolution of the photoreal background. KORD and KJFK have the SAME resolution for ground!
--- Quote ---collin pointed this out, and he is right.
--- End quote ---
No. It might have been right, if the scenery really looked like his screenshot. But it doesn't. Look at Ray's screenshots again, and tell me if the resolution it's the same. And see his PC specs...
--- Quote ---to make clear the problem just take a look into this topic:
http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=967.15
there you will find the answer why fsdt decided to do it this way.
--- End quote ---
That explanation was meant to say why the scenery has a photoreal background + detail texture above it (exactly like KORD), instead of a super hi-res multi-GB photoreal background only, but the scenery is NOT blurred as much as the screenshot that was posted there.
In that screenshot, the photoreal background was not loaded in full res AND the detail texture wasn't even loaded, this probably because of the flatten problem, that we fixed a few days after the release.
Colin's screenshots DO show the detail texure instead (so it already has the updated flatten version), but the photoreal background is WAY more blurred than in reality is. So, it's a different problem compared to the one in thread you mentioned, because in that case it was the detail texture that was entirely missing, probably because of the (already fixed) flatten issue.
This is how the scenery looks like on my PC at the same spot of the thread you pointed out, see the attached picture. The detail texture is clearly visible and the photoreal background has better res anyway.
Yes, KORD might look somewhat better, but ONLY because of the distintive signs/cracks/lines than appear on the detail texture to simulate concrete, which are not obviously present on asphalt, NOT because it has a better background resolution. The explanation was trying to tell that, we can't double the background resolution (quadrupling scenery size) "just" because asphalt is more difficult to fake with details...
However, that KORD looks a little bit (not *that* much) better it's not the main point here, the point is: KFJK DOES NOT looks as bad as in the Avsim review shots!!!
--- Quote ---unfortunately fsdt had to make this compromise in order to get this huge mass of different ground colors handeled.
--- End quote ---
Yes, of course compromises are always made, but that's doesn't mean the scenery really looks like the screenshot posted on Avsim.
[attachment deleted by admin]
virtuali:
Another comparison, which I think close the question beyond any doubt:
KJFK 4L from the Avsim review:
KFJK 4L on my PC:
JamesChams:
Mr. Umberto "Virtuali" Colapicchioni,
Could you please just post your *recommended* settings for FS9/FSX for this scenery (for High/Low end systems), like you did when you/Kappa gave me your .cfg file(s)? In the updated Manual(s) would be great place to put it for all your scenery products. This would greatly decrease the confusion, about what are users computer limitations, from a package's settings requirement issues. And, may end topics that lead to "YAPD" or you trying to convince people of our incorrect knowledge about your products. I don't think anyone cares; we just want to enjoy and use the products as you intended.
I think I have indicated to you before that I don't care to know everything about FSX and the creation of each and every scenery package after installing and buying it. *We* users just want it to work and that isn't always clear for people with low end systems or limited knowledge in hardware settings/tweaking. I, myself, (as an example) have a very high-end system and it "chokes" a little with KJFK; Not at all with KORD, LSZH, Greystone or even FlyTampa's Kai-Tai which, I fully load up with everything to max including all AI types in FSX. I get average 47-77 FPS even with "high demand" models like Aerosoft's F-16 or CaptainSim's C-130 / 757's on those scenery packages and NO OC'ing or super-cooling liquid utilities are involved.
But...
The KJFK package has a few, shall we say *gremlins*, that aren't showing up on your test machines but are still unresolved on the open market. I recently tested the latest download of KJFK with another completely different hardware/system to be used on an FTD at a FBO. Although, I don't have this exact issue as Colin, I've already indicated the ones that I have and, am sadly, still able to replicate those issues mentioned on the FTD system.
Perhaps after you're done working out your current projects you can look at these issues. Please don't continue to tell me that it is a personal issue for this user alone or me for mine. I have seen issues posted elsewhere that have similar or *newer* problems with this current version of the product. I'll wait for you to have time to fix it and perhaps between now and then you can resolve Colin's problem(s).
Good Luck!
PS: If users have other opinions you are free to express them but please don't try to argue your point endlessly; I simple don't care. Like Colin, I want my purchased product to work as advertised.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version