Gibraltar X Released.

[WingZ 3]

To be honest, I don't really understand a comment like this.

So because a freeware designer didn't get some other aspect 100% right, Gibraltar becomes Great?

The freeware designer sure as hell got right, that which Aerosoft should've got right with a Payware scenery.

I suppose nobody is going to post that Great screenshot here, after all.

I'm assuming then, that there is a problem with the scenery, and it's not just me.

And that the publisher could not give a toss.

This is sad, because I used to buy Aerosoft without hesitation.

No longer...and of course with this kind of attitude, others will get the message too, and hold off.

Ultimately the hobby suffers, and that can't be good.

[Andy B. 40]

No ultimately the other folk reading this will realise that you don't understand what near vertical and stretched means.

[Andy B. 40]

This is how Gibrator X looks like this morning, a lovely 20 Celsius already.

[delly 1]

Not trying to stoke the fire or anything but actually I think it could have been handled better too.

Firstly let me say the scenery is stunning, the detail, the petrol station! Everything it seems apart from the back section of the rock (pic 2).

Vertical stretch is obviously a tricky problem in FS, that perhaps combined with Andy's poor configuration of LOD and a less than ultra system may exacerbate the issue.

But some areas of the rock, areas that are also nearly vertical seem more acceptable i.e. the main rock in pic 1. Given the huge amounts of time spent on this scenery, I think it would not be unreasonable to have spent some time manually touching up the textures (pixelate might reduce stretch look?) or adjusted the polygon structure slightly to produce a less stetched cliff (I think this has been done at the front).

Having said all that, it is a minor blip on an otherwise fantastic scenery!

Wingz you can try increasing LOD above the normal max of 4.5 in your fsg.cfg, bear in mind that it will change back if you change any GFX settings in FSX.

ps aerosoft for the record my system can handle max settings here

[Shaun Fletcher 570]

Hello Folks,

The unfortunate thing about FS is that some people want absolute perfection, whilst some freeware person may be able to do this that and the other does not mean that someone else has the time to, and also that more time is more money and people soon start to moan when the price of something goes up dramatically because perfection is called for.

FS also has its quirks especially when it comes to meshes and textures if you have a problem with the way it looks then the people to write to would be the developers of the Sim and not the developer of the scenery product.

[WingZ 3]

OK well it's a business decision, apparently nothing further will come of this.

Perhaps someone in the flightsim community will figure out how to remove the lo-res Google Earth aerial photo and replace it with a decent one, and also get rid of the LOD 9, 10, and 11 meshes which ruin the approach.

Until then it's off my HDD, which is a pity because the airport and AES are excellent.

[Shaun Fletcher 570]

Hello Wingz,

Sorry you feel that way, but what about all the places where the game itself produces these effects.

Your going to remove the whole scenery because of the rock.

[WingZ 3]

Shaun,

I look for consistency in a flightsim installation, almost before outright quality.

The kind that in a screenshot, creates "suspension of disbelief" wherever you look.

Let's say the stock install scores 4/10.

Any addon must improve that, and I like to pick an aircraft that "fits" the level of scenery.

For the Gibraltar addon, I'd score the terminal 8.5/10, and the traffic too.

Terminal area base topography lags a little at 7/10, but I don't find it too jarring.

So I pick an "8" or better aircraft, Captain Sim's C130 or the FSD Porter work nicely.

I score The Rock itself at a solid 4/10, no better than stock.

That is being charitable, because as an addon, it should be adding, not detracting.

I fly my"8" aircraft in front of the "4" Rock and am disinclined totake a screenshot!

So scoring the scenery as a whole, it gets dragged down to the lowest common denominator, in the same way that 3 litres of clean oil plus 1 of dirty oil is 4 litres of dirty oil.

As I said in an earlier post, beautiful scenery of Paris with the Big Feature (Eiffel Tower) modelled as a10-poly lump would not really work either

The high scores actually accentuate the poorly scoring component...

SO overall it scores a lowly 4.5, and because I've paid for it I am irritated.

I'm not actually about to ask for my money back, I bought without due diligence.

But I am irritated enough to dump the whole thing, and just not bother to go there.

[WingZ 3]

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?51843-New-Scenery-Building-Technique%21

...is what I am talking about.

It's not actually new, but it would solve the problem in this scenery.