Thoughts of Orbx PNW products (keep a civil tongue)

[OleBoy]

Comment;

Orbx could seriously better their products of the PNW. If all their scenery is done in the same lack-lustre, generic sort of placement from what I've seen while flying Orbx PNW Blue, personally, I really don't see a lot that's unique to this region short of airports, static objects and trees. It is nicer than default. What I don't understand, is they obviously have the tools to do the scenery. I just don't see it being done as good as it could be. I was to the understanding that the idea in their scenery was created more to the VFR type pilots.

Final thoughts; The more I fly the scenery, I think the Orbx PNW has an orbx-generic-visual-appearance, and really lacks for what the Pacific Northwest really is.

No disrespect intended

Just for the record, I live in the Pacific Northwest. I expect more from scenery that I have to purchase. So, I added my rating for the topic. Mainly a quality-to-region rating

I'd like to hear from others, their honest opinions, that live in the region. Don't mis-interpret my comment.
....The scenery is nice. But, could be so much better than what it is. Beyond the airport additions that seem to be the norm.
Their scenery seems to be by region. I'd like to see it created that way for where we live.

[mmann]

Orbx uses the cookie cutter approach to the airports they include in a regional package. Every time I fly into one, the song "Little Boxes" by Pete Seeger keeps running through my mind. It looks like they have used a satellite image and then placed a generic type building to match the size and position of the buildings shown on the image. Remember also that the regional packages are considered almost a loss leader to Orbx; their money maker is the individual airports that they sell for these regions, and those airports are extremely well done and also very accurate.

Regards, Mike Mann

[OleBoy]

Mike, you are correct about the cookie cutter approach, but how long, really, do we spend at airports short of landing and taking off. I don't live in an airport and sleep in my plane. If I did, I guess that would consider me a bum and a vagrant. I get into a plane to fly and see the scenery! Once in the air I see a big generic puzzle.

[mmann]

Once in the air I see a big generic puzzle.

You are absolutely right about that!! Flying with Orbx PNW enabled is prettier than using UTX, GEX with FSGenesis but not more realistic. When flying parts of Vancouver Island I have found that UTX Canada has a great deal more of the secondary logging roads represented than does Orbx, and UTX covers the whole country!

Regards, Mike Mann

[OleBoy]

You are absolutely right about that!! Flying with Orbx PNW enabled is prettier than using UTX, GEX with FSGenesis but not more realistic. When flying parts of Vancouver Island I have found that UTX Canada has a great deal more of the secondary logging roads represented than does Orbx, and UTX covers the whole country!

Regards, Mike Mann

I think we're on the same page in terms of "generic" I'll also quote a previous comment.


Remember also that the regional packages are considered almost a loss leader to Orbx; their money maker is the individual airports that they sell for these regions, and those airports are extremely well done and also very accurate

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?53699-Thoughts-of-Orbx-PNW-products-%28keep-a-civil-tongue%29&p=587340&viewfull=1#post587340

[DaveKDEN]

All things considered, you're getting a lot of bang for your buck with ORBx products. Having recently purchased Northern Rocky Mountains, and having owned PNW since it came out, I'm very happy. No, it's not 100% correct - and there are some problems that should be addressed, but how much do you really want to spend on an add-on scenery product? I have no doubt the team could add many more details, but it would take time and most certainly add a significant amount to the cost. ORBx has to balance those factors when building their products. Also considering MS Flight's coming release (who really knows when), how many are willing to spend a lot of cash on what will soon be an antiquated product.

Oh yea, grew up in WA state.

[heywooood]

I bought PNW because it looks so much better than default FSX...

I did not assume it would perfectly replicate the region to the last brick and stone because that would be a stupendous undertaking...but for color, texture, shorelines, forestation etc it is worth the money spent. I do wish I could get higher frame rates with it but isn't that always the case, and less ORBX fault than microsofts...

That said, I am not sure I will buy the Southwest when it becomes available as that is where I live, and too much familiarity would probably make me too critical as well.

[OleBoy]

Regarding the last two posts, come on guys, I'm not knocking the scenery at all. I'm saying, it can be better. Far better. And as for the cost, the better it looks, the better my virtual experience. Which is exactly why I am into all this flight simulator stuff to begin with. Cost is not relevant to virtual realism IMHO.

And to add, How many times do we have to keep buying what could be the best there is available. Orbx can do better. So why not push them to make it better? It's a win/win for them, and their consumers.

[spotlope]

Sooner or later, every dev who tries hard enough can finally be the victim of their own success, I suppose. Just the other day, I got raked over the coals by a Cushman Meadows user because he was unhappy that I used such a large photo-real area in the scenery. He preferred the generic landclass textures. What can you do but roll your eyes?

OleBoy, try turning off the Orbx stuff entirely and flying over the PNW for a while, then let me know how poorly we did it. I think you may be so used to what you're seeing that you forget how far it's come.

[spotlope]

Regarding the last two posts, come on guys, I'm not knocking the scenery at all. I'm saying, it can be better. Far better. And as for the cost, the better it looks, the better my virtual experience. Which is exactly why I am into all this flight simulator stuff to begin with. Cost is not relevant to virtual realism IMHO.

And to add, How many times do we have to keep buying what could be the best there is available. Orbx can do better. So why not push them to make it better? It's a win/win for them, and their consumers.

We're pushing to make things better all the time. New tech (TextureFlow, PeopleFlow, ObjectFlow), new features (3D grass, trees with leaves that actually fall the love love of Mike!). We patch, we update, we relentlessly pursue making it better. Honestly, it's hard not to get hot under the collar when I see posts like this. I'm not gonna, though, because it's not worth it.

[OleBoy]

I'm not meaning to get anyone flared at the collar. Not at all my intentions in my post. Which is why I added, out of respect for Orbx and the creators "keep it civil".


OleBoy, try turning off the Orbx stuff entirely and flying over the PNW for a while, then let me know how poorly we did it. I think you may be so used to what you're seeing that you forget how far it's come.No, I know what it looks like Bill. I'm new to FSX from an autogen/density perspective. And performance. But since I got this new machine, it really enhanced my virtual reality ten fold. I have UT for the USA, Canada, etc. Along with Ground Environment. That stuff never gets activated because I fly specifically Orbx in my region because they are the best to date, visually.

I'm not complaining really. More of voicing to say, it can be a lot better. I expected it to be a lot better. And I'm voicing that to let them know now.

I'm a member of Orbx forums. But their forums are a cluster. Needs to all get flushed except for relevant information and start fresh

[Kiwikat]

We're pushing to make things better all the time. New tech (TextureFlow, PeopleFlow, ObjectFlow), new features (3D grass, trees with leaves that actually fall the love love of Mike!). We patch, we update, we relentlessly pursue making it better. Honestly, it's hard not to get hot under the collar when I see posts like this. I'm not gonna, though, because it's not worth it.

I am absolutely positive the ratio of people who enjoy their orbx products to those who don't is far higher than any other scenery company.

When I fly in non-orbx regions, they look flat at best. Your sceneries bring much needed life and realism to the simulator. :ernae:

[mmann]

That said, I am not sure I will buy the Southwest when it becomes available as that is where I live, and too much familiarity would probably make me too critical as well.

I think you hit the nail on the head! My problem is that I know (and love) Vancouver Island; I guess I too was quite disappointed that the freeware Victoria Plus (by Don Grovestine, Jon Patch and Holger Sandmann) was so much more realistic than the Orbx representation of the area.

Regards, Mike Mann

[OleBoy]

I am absolutely positive the ratio of people who enjoy their orbx products to those who don't is far higher than any other scenery company.

When I fly in non-orbx regions, they look flat at best. Your sceneries bring much needed life and realism to the simulator. :ernae:

I agree 100%

To add, Google Earth is a great tool.

[spotlope]

I'm not meaning to get anyone flared at the collar. Not at all my intentions in my post. Which is why I added, out of respect for Orbx and the creators "keep it civil".

No, I know what it looks like Bill. I'm new to FSX from an autogen/density perspective. And performance. But since I got this new machine, it really enhanced my virtual reality ten fold. I have UT for the USA, Canada, etc. Along with Ground Environment. That stuff never gets activated because I fly specifically Orbx in my region because they are the best to date, visually.

I'm not complaining really. More of voicing to say, it can be a lot better. I expected it to be a lot better. And I'm voicing that to let them know now.

I'm a member of Orbx forums. But their forums are a cluster. Needs to all get flushed except for relevant information and start fresh

How in the world did your expectations get set for the scenery in the first place? Looking at the reams of screenshots online from our staff or many satisfied customers? Watching the dozens of gorgeous videos that have been produced featuring the PNW? Reading reviews? Honestly, between ourselves and our fans, there's ample opportunity to educate yourself on exactly what you're getting with the scenery before purchase. If, once you've gotten it, you're mad that it doesn't make you coffee or simonize your car, there's not much we can do about that.

[DaveKDEN]

Regarding the last two posts, come on guys, I'm not knocking the scenery at all. I'm saying, it can be better. Far better. And as for the cost, the better it looks, the better my virtual experience. Which is exactly why I am into all this flight simulator stuff to begin with. Cost is not relevant to virtual realism IMHO.

And to add, How many times do we have to keep buying what could be the best there is available. Orbx can do better. So why not push them to make it better? It's a win/win for them, and their consumers.

I know you're not necessarily trying to knock ORBx. My opinion is that I feel you get quite a bit of bang for your buck - that's all.
As for cost not being relevant to virtual realism for you, that rule doesn't apply to most. ORBx has to balance that simple fact.

[OleBoy]

How in the world did your expectations get set for the scenery in the first place? Looking at the reams of screenshots online from our staff or many satisfied customers? Watching the dozens of gorgeous videos that have been produced featuring the PNW? Reading reviews? Honestly, between ourselves and our fans, there's ample opportunity to educate yourself on exactly what you're getting with the scenery before purchase. If, once you've gotten it, you're mad that it doesn't make you coffee or simonize your car, there's not much we can do about that.

Uh Oh. I never knew that a "making coffee add-on", or "simonizing flow add-on" was available? Kidding!!

Bill, I looked at, and watched all the videos and photos I could ever find. I also spent quite a bit of time at the Orbx forum reading before ever considering. I don't buy anything based on strictly opinions, because everyone has one in a different aspect.

Short of that, that's my best answer for my expectations.

To add to, All the pictures and videos (most) are based around airports Orbx has created as their focus. Which is all good. Great I mean. My whole subject is based on the scenery in a general aspect of generic-ness in look. Meaning more of a patch work quilt from an aerial perspective from a VFR product as they lure.

[spotlope]

Uh Oh. I never knew that a "making coffee add-on", or "simonizing flow add-on" was available? Kidding!!

Bill, I looked at, and watched all the videos and photos I could ever find. I also spent quite a bit of time at the Orbx forum reading before ever considering. I don't buy anything based on strictly opinions, because everyone has one in a different aspect.

Short of that, that's my best answer for my expectations.

To add to, All the pictures and videos (most) are based around airports Orbx has created as their focus. Which is all good. Great I mean. My whole subject is based on the scenery in a general aspect of generic-ness in look. Meaning more of a patch work quilt from an aerial perspective from a VFR product as they lure.

Then your complaint is with the FSX landclass system, not Orbx. We've done a lot of really great things with the toolbox we were given by MS, but there are limits.

Out of curiosity, who in your opinion does this stuff better than Orbx? That's a real question, not baiting. Knowing who your favorite scenery designers are would help me understand why you seem so frustrated with our stuff.

[limjack]

Once I downloaded PNW there was no going back. I was even collecting the mega scenery earth of this area and that has now sat idle. Simply put I have never had a scenery package quite like this one. I feel like I am right at home when flying in the NW scenery and almost feel as though I took a real trip to the places that I have visited all around here. Also my rig is almost 3 years old and has no issues running the scenery package as long as I go low and slow. Can it get better? O yes, I expect it will as the carrot is alway hanging ahead of us and as our rigs can handle more I bet the scenery complexity will increase. Gotta keep the carrot ahead to help drive us all and I am loving it!

Thanks Orbx for such a awesome product!!!!

Jim

[Bruce Thompson]

What's up Oleboy, you board again?

I think it would be wise for the Mods to lock this thread, before it becomes very uncivil.

I don't like the idea that I should be asked for my opinion under the "Keep it Civil" banner,
that implies that the product is in some way at fault, which in my and no doubt other users it is not.

[N2056]

This is close to locked. Even closer with statements like that last one.
Addressing members by name like that tends to get looked at by more staff than you might think. Please avoid getting personal.

[OleBoy]

Then your complaint is with the FSX landclass system, not Orbx. We've done a lot of really great things with the toolbox we were given by MS, but there are limits.

Out of curiosity, who in your opinion does this stuff better than Orbx? That's a real question, not baiting. Knowing who your favorite scenery designers are would help me understand why you seem so frustrated with our stuff.

I'm not frustrated at all. Although there are areas I have found to be, out of order, etc.

My favorite scenery designers, and only, Orbx. Of which I will purchase more eventually. I have high expectations of their products and very much want to see them flourish in their venture for our virtual realism experiences.

[Timbohobo]

We value all feedback highly,

Please feel free to drop in to our support forum and file a report, the more you highlight bugs or errors to us in a logical and amicable manner, the better the likelihood that it ends up in a patch or service pack.


Cheers
Tim :)

(ORBX region dev)

[spotlope]

I'm not frustrated at all. Although there are areas I have found to be, out of order, etc.

My favorite scenery designers, and only, Orbx. Of which I will purchase more eventually. I have high expectations of their products and very much want to see them flourish in their venture for our virtual realism experiences.

Okay, so Orbx are your favorite scenery designers, so clearly we're not screwing up too badly. You want it better, but have yet to lay out anything specific you'd like to see added. There's not much we can do with that, is there?

Seems to me your best course of action would be to get your hands dirty with some scenery development. If you've got specific things you'd like to see improved and have the ability to make it happen, we'll certainly never stand in your way.

[OleBoy]

We value all feedback highly,

Please feel free to drop in to our support forum and file a report, the more you highlight bugs or errors to us in a logical and amicable manner, the better the likelihood that it ends up in a patch or service pack.


Cheers
Tim :)

I have considered doing so several times. The issue is that "I" physically did not purchase Orbx PNW. I recieved it as a Christmas gift. Burned to dvd and given to me in a Christmas card this last Christmas. I do not have an order number unless I can get it from which ever one made the physical purchase. I am to the understanding without the order number(s), my opinions would be wiped off the desk. So I haven't pursued voicing my thoughts in the forum.

I have spoke to JayKae on several occasions. Though not on the subject at hand. But purchasing more of the Orbx products.

[Tim-HH]

The FS community is glutted...that's the problem. With all these hundreds of addons it gets more and more difficult to satisfy the user. It's easier to criticize a five-star meal when you are sated...

In my opinion, Orbx is doing by far the best FSX scenery addons. And Orbx has done more for FSX and it's general acceptance by the user than any other FS addon company!

And let's face it: A FSX scenery that is a 100% correct rendition of its real counterpart simply doesn't exist!

Greetings
Tim

[flyingip]

I like what they do. It really improves the default fsx and makes the flight a lot more enjoyable. On top of that their stand alone airfield really improve what they already had!

However I'd like it if they'd include a few more detailed airports within the scenery. Mainly the really small strips.

[OleBoy]

Okay, so Orbx are your favorite scenery designers, so clearly we're not screwing up too badly. You want it better, but have yet to lay out anything specific you'd like to see added. There's not much we can do with that, is there?

Seems to me your best course of action would be to get your hands dirty with some scenery development. If you've got specific things you'd like to see improved and have the ability to make it happen, we'll certainly never stand in your way.

See above

I know how to do repaints. Pretty crafty with graphics and whatnot. I'll help any developers if they gave me a chance and/or I had the skill or knowledge they were looking for. If it was something that was needed by a set date, that's a bit too far for my helping. I'm all for making what we have, better.


With all respect, I think the subject has ran it's course.

[Roger]

The main thing is it's affordable and makes PNW look great. If I want to see my house and my garden with me sitting in it I'll commission someone to create a few square miles of perfection and pay them £50,000 to do it...if I could possibly afford it. I fly mainly PNW because how it looks and how it looks so much better than anything else I have seen.

[hcornea]

.....
....The scenery is nice. But, could be so much better than what it is. Beyond the airport additions that seem to be the norm..

Hi All,

Now that is really cryptic! One of the things about improving scenery is that you have to be specific. So you have to be more specific than just wanting it "better" ... you have to tell us what is missing.

One of the great things about doing work for ORBX is how much the team engages suggestions and notes errata ... and fixes it, but you need specifics to work with.

We're always interested in threads like this one, to see what can be improved ... but I have to say that having read it I'm not a great deal the wiser, which does make me unsure quite what the initial point was.

As many of the posters here also post at FSDeveloper they are aware of the time involved with updating every airport in the region ... hence each airport doesn't have a plethora of specifically modelled objects.
EDIT: which I think is the point Roger has made very well above!

Indeed, if the scenery is a "loss-leader" as was suggested earlier, then by definition it must be EXCEPTIONAL value!

Cheers to all, and glad to hear of the many who are enjoying flying the scenery.

Ian
(ORBX Modelling / Airport Dev Team)

[heywooood]

Bill Womack is based in Oregon by his bio, and Oleboy in Washington - certainly both of them have a certain familiarity with the region.

I am sure that, based on all other contributions by Mr. Womack, that accuracy and quality standards were adhered to as best as possible given the time, the investment, and the microsoft constraints he was working with.

Anytime one asks for more porridge, no matter how politely, one risks being taken at cross purposes unfortunately - and I think that's all this was.

[spotlope]

Bill Womack is based in Oregon by his bio, and Oleboy in Washington - certainly both of them have a certain familiarity with the region.

I am sure that, based on all other contributions by Mr. Womack, that accuracy and quality standards were adhered to as best as possible given the time, the investment, and the microsoft constraints he was working with.

Anytime one asks for more porridge, no matter how politely, one risks being taken at cross purposes unfortunately - and I think that's all this was.

Here's the difference: "This porridge was great, could I have some more, and perhaps a little toast to go with it?" vs. "Wow, that was colder and lumpier than I expected. You really need to try harder with your porridge making". The former would have been welcomed. The latter was what I heard.

[OleBoy]

I'm a direct straight forward type. Misunderstood by many until they get to know me. Unfortunately, here in text, this is the way I come across most times. I can attest that my intentions and heading are true as to where I was going with the topic. I was in no way meaning, or trying to get someone on the stake. Even though that's where it was heading when others deflected the subject beyond my control. Which told me then that I should have contacted Mr. Womack via PM and exchanged comments in private. If I'd thought of "who", especially here at SOH, I had no clue the topic would get side swiped as it did. But had to continue, to keep it in line of my direction for posting in the first place. Some comments by members were not needed. Live and learn.

What did I learn? Don't post openly in the forum for others to add comment.

To sum it up. I'd like to see the scenery in general, appear more like the PNW than it does. Plain and simple. And if I can help make it happen, I'm offering what little time I have to add to my enjoyment.

[Roger]

Best way OleBoy would be to post on the ORBX forums with suggestions but their products have such a good following that some will be defensive on any flight sim forum.
I don't think much more can be said here so it's time to close it before it gets really nasty.