Board index » FlyTampa » Boston-Logan - KBOS

Post a reply

right?

Postby skimmer » Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:50 pm

No definition? I am so satisfied with BUF by Fly Tampa, that I purcashed BOS. I gotta say at this point there is no comparison in quality. :-(
2012-9-13_20-3-17-820.jpg
2012-9-13_20-3-17-820.jpg (505.04 KiB) Viewed 380 times
skimmer
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 8:16 pm
Location: South St. Paul Mn.

Re: right?

Postby george[flytampa] » Thu Sep 13, 2012 9:05 pm

Looks normal to me. Boston is limited to 1024 textures for FS9 compatibly so not everything can be high res.
If we used more textures, your graphics card will eventually start to choke, resulting in stutters.
Its basic computer graphics. Buffalo is much smaller than Boston so we could used more details. If it was a farm Cessna strip with one hangar, the resolution could be 10x higher. Unfortunately at large airports we have to spread the resources over the entire airport. This is also based on computer systems around at the time of development. Each year they get faster.

Our scenery is balanced for a range of computers. Slow & fast. I aim for a good overall look rather than dense texels.
Buffalo suffers from some of the same problems. I made both sceneries, so I know their weaknesses. 99% of customers won't care about this issue. I do though.
george[flytampa]
Site Admin
Posts: 2305
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 11:53 pm
Location: Southampton, UK

Re: right?

Postby skimmer » Fri Sep 14, 2012 9:10 am

Thank you very much for that very resonable information george. I'm glad I purcashed KBOS . Good work :)
Thank you
2012-9-13_20-11-24-45.jpg
2012-9-13_20-11-24-45.jpg (385.27 KiB) Viewed 362 times
skimmer
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 8:16 pm
Location: South St. Paul Mn.
Post a reply