Correct, and if one thinks about it, that makes sense.

"Panorama" airfields are basically 2D photos projected onto the inside of a virtual circle, the center of which is the pilot's view point.

Collisions at these 2D airfields are handled by imposing an invisible 3D object onto the image in the background. That gives the illusion of a plane crashing into something in the photo.

If you shift the pilot's viewpoint, the illusion is broken, and the collision objects also appear displaced.

This is how most panoramic sims display their airfields.

3D ( laughingly called "4D" by another sim ) airfields are completely computer generated

Since the entire "world" is mathematically generated, the pilots view point can be moved with perspective, 3D and parallax all coming out correct, so much so that you can take these fields one step further and even use Stereoscopic 3D for depth perception.

3D RC fields are of course much harder to render, require better graphics engines and more processing power.

It is unfortunate that the graphics engines in 3D RC sims has not yet approached the fidelity of top tier computer & video games. In turn that causes many neophytes to exclaim that 3D RC sim airfields look very "cartoony" or "unrealistic" compared to 3D airfields.

Yet you can't have leaves fall off a tree when you clip it with a plane in a panoramic airfield, you can't move the view point, etc. etc. etc.