X-Codr KDEN Released

[UAL4life 282]

18 hours ago, Mike T said:

Wow. I just can't let this MAGNIFICENT scenery fall off the map. I've never heard of this developer before but I can say this, he has released one of THE BEST major airport sceneries for MSFS period. Also having the Flightbeam KDEN, this blows it away.

It just goes to show that instead of demogogueing only a few developers, it is important to keep an open mind because when you do, you get quiet beauties like this that come with no hype, no advertising, and no BS. Just a developer delivering extreme quality. 

If you are a UAL flier like me this is a MUST HAVE. If you are a Denver fan, it is a MUST HAVE. If you enjoy Flightbeam's KDEN, then you will enjoy this more, because it is better. A little better you may ask? No a LOT better. Even the AFD with FSLTL is truely a sight to see. Probably one of the best AFD's I've seen in MSFS to date.

So...game on Flightbeam - you gonna let the new guy take the KDEN crown from ya? 🙂

One thing I did note, with all that delicious detail, it is definitely harder on frames than the FB KDEN with full AI traffic. But man...is it worth it. I really hope this developer makes MSFS his home because he is immediately at the FlyTampa, FSDreamTeam, and FlightBeam level.

Mike T.

 

Wow guess I have to buy it then. I’ll start using FBs again when and if they update it. Hopefully it will get the CE treatment SFO got by 2028

[B777ER 2,663]

On 6/20/2024 at 7:06 PM, micstatic said:

Eric.  Please let us know your thoughts once you've looked around. 

 

On 6/20/2024 at 11:02 PM, Drumcode said:

Eagerly waiting for your review and opinion being this is my home airport. This came out of nowhere. 

So, just landed here. TBH, it's for sure not bad. The textures look pretty good and of course the layout is accurate. It is a bit harder on frames than FB version. Now having said that, all things being equal, if @Mir // Flightbeam version was up to date with the terminals and taxiways, I would stay with his version. When Mir updates his, even if he charges an upgrade fee, I would purchase it and stick with Flightbeam's. Why, the FB version just has a bit more polish IMO but that for sure is subjective. For now, I will keep this version as it is up to date with the real world.  

[X-Codr Designs 44]

Thank you all for the enthusiasm and support! Based on some of your feedback, I've added a few more exteriors shots and shots of the cargo area, I realize these areas got a bit overlooked screenshot wise. If there are any areas in particular you'd like more photos of, or you have questions, please don't hesitate to ask!

@B777ER You mention that the FB version feels a bit more polished - if I may ask, are there any particular areas of my version of KDEN you feel could be better? I do plan to release an update within a few weeks to address any bugs that pop up, and improve a few elements that I feel could be better, but I'd love to hear what you guys are interested in seeing improved!

[B777ER 2,663]

3 minutes ago, X-Codr Designs said:

Thank you all for the enthusiasm and support! Based on some of your feedback, I've added a few more exteriors shots and shots of the cargo area, I realize these areas got a bit overlooked screenshot wise. If there are any areas in particular you'd like more photos of, or you have questions, please don't hesitate to ask!

@B777ER You mention that the FB version feels a bit more polished - if I may ask, are there any particular areas of my version of KDEN you feel could be better? I do plan to release an update within a few weeks to address any bugs that pop up, and improve a few elements that I feel could be better, but I'd love to hear what you guys are interested in seeing improved!

1. The black lines in the concrete are way too pronounced in between the terminals and taxiways when compared to the satelitte views on Google and Bing maps.

2. The red and white line markings for the aircraft boundaries for each gate don't show the wear and use like the concrete and the yellow guide in line / stop bars at each gate. Seems it's a very stark contrast which gives a very fake look to them. Would prefer to have those boundary lines more subdued and showing wear.

3. I use TAA and there is some z-fighting (flickering) on some textures around the terminal buildings. 

 

[UAL4life 282]

Ok I love this scenery. It’s a different style than FB but the new additions more than make up for it. 
 

only thing to do really is create a mask to get rid of the trees on the west end of the airport and half way past the E470 overpass and to the main turn of Peña blvd (that’s where the tree foliage starts irl)

Edited June 22 by UAL4life

[Mike T 243]

6 minutes ago, B777ER said:

1. The black lines in the concrete are way too pronounced in between the terminals and taxiways when compared to the satelitte views on Google and Bing maps.

2. The red and white line markings for the aircraft boundaries for each gate don't show the wear and use like the concrete and the yellow guide in line / stop bars at each gate. Seems it's a very stark contrast which gives a very fake look to them. Would prefer to have those boundary lines more subdued and showing wear.

3. I use TAA and there is some z-fighting (flickering) on some textures around the terminal buildings. 

 

1. I thought that at first too. But if you go to Google Maps and zoom in, the concrete squares are very, very pronounced and the boundary lines are very thick. I think he's spot on there. The FB ground squares were actually too faint. 

2. Agree, the concrete is worn, but the boundary line markings look too new. Could use some blending.

3. No issues on this end - 4090 in DX12 and FG/TAA

[X-Codr Designs 44]

15 minutes ago, B777ER said:

1. The black lines in the concrete are way too pronounced in between the terminals and taxiways when compared to the satelitte views on Google and Bing maps.

2. The red and white line markings for the aircraft boundaries for each gate don't show the wear and use like the concrete and the yellow guide in line / stop bars at each gate. Seems it's a very stark contrast which gives a very fake look to them. Would prefer to have those boundary lines more subdued and showing wear.

3. I use TAA and there is some z-fighting (flickering) on some textures around the terminal buildings. 

 

Thank you so much for the feedback!

1. Reviewing this, I agree these should probably be a bit more subtle in some places.

2. Great catch! Looks like I have the order wrong and put the lines above the grunge overlays, oops! I'll definitely get this fixed in the next update

3. I always use DLSS with DLAA for anti-aliasing so I hadn't noticed this, trying with TAA, I do see what you're talking about. Not sure if it's actually z-fighting or if it's the TAA algorithm removing small features, regardless I'll see what I can do and keep you posted. Thank you for bringing this to my attention!

Edited June 22 by X-Codr Designs

[Aglos77 204]

One of my favourite developers of my dear x-plane so nice that you can enjoy it too in mfs.

[B777ER 2,663]

3 hours ago, X-Codr Designs said:

Thank you so much for the feedback!

1. Reviewing this, I agree these should probably be a bit more subtle in some places.

2. Great catch! Looks like I have the order wrong and put the lines above the grunge overlays, oops! I'll definitely get this fixed in the next update

3. I always use DLSS with DLAA for anti-aliasing so I hadn't noticed this, trying with TAA, I do see what you're talking about. Not sure if it's actually z-fighting or if it's the TAA algorithm removing small features, regardless I'll see what I can do and keep you posted. Thank you for bringing this to my attention!

One more issue I just saw. There is a dip in the tarmac by gates A15 down to about A21 it’s just as you approach the yellow lead in lines to the gates. Goes out to about the AN taxiway line

[X-Codr Designs 44]

3 hours ago, B777ER said:

One more issue I just saw. There is a dip in the tarmac by gates A15 down to about A21 it’s just as you approach the yellow lead in lines to the gates. Goes out to about the AN taxiway line

Thank you for letting me know. I'll get a hotfix out ASAP, probably Monday. So sorry about that.

[JBDB-MD80 1,595]

Off topic but

 

Can we get a KDFW scenery next please as no other developer wants to touch it? Thank you for your work anyways X-Codr. If you made a great KDFW, KATL and or LFPG you could retire from scenery development. IMO as they would sell like hotcakes.

Edited June 23 by JBDB-MD80

[X-Codr Designs 44]

Just to follow up on the hotfix - it's been submitted to Orbx, I would imagine they're traveling back from FSExpo so it may or may not be available today. That being said, if you scroll to the bottom of linked page, you can find a patch for the terrain issues, along with install instructions. MSFS KDEN | X Codr Designs (x-codrdesigns.com)

The full update also includes re-layering of the large-scale grunge so it is on top of the lines, fixes for a handful of floating people in Concourse C, fixes for some stuff in the way of one of the tunnels on C, and hopefully a reduction in potential flickering with TAA. I have some other ideas to improve this further, but those changes are a bit more extensive.

[Greazer 1,434]

Question, who is X-Codr?  Seems like a new mystery dev.  I also hope they can do KATL just like this one.

[Turpentine 394]

Can the interior scenery be turned off to help with framerate?

[Gulf76 8]

2 hours ago, Greazer said:

Question, who is X-Codr?  Seems like a new mystery dev.  I also hope they can do KATL just like this one.

I have his Sedona scenery and it’s delightful! I think this is his first attempt at a large airport. I’ll be flying back into KDEN in August IRL so  I’ll probably pick this up based on the quality of his Sedona scenery. 
 

https://www.x-codrdesigns.com/msfs-sedona-red-rocks