Page 2 of 12

Posted: 10 Aug 2006, 13:12
by andy
Rick,
They seem to be woking on the eye candy, instead of getting the basics sorted. It's such a shame as it could be one hell of a sim.

Posted: 10 Aug 2006, 13:41
by andy
I've just loaded some of my own scenery, and it seems to be OK. :smile:

Posted: 10 Aug 2006, 13:49
by AndyG
andy wrote:I've just loaded some of my own scenery, and it seems to be OK. :smile:
Which answered my textures question. :smile:

AndyG

Posted: 10 Aug 2006, 13:50
by Quixoticish
I've just installed a few addon aircraft. They work fine (apart from an error message that FS98 gauges aren't supported anymore) with one problem:

Image

As you can see the aircraft appears to be transparent, although it isn't readily apparently in this shot. Have a look yourselves. I'm not sure why this would be and how easily fixable it is?

I'm not that happy with the performance. It runs far worse than FS2004 when I make FS2004 look ten times better.

Posted: 10 Aug 2006, 13:55
by andy
The frame rates are locked at 15fps.
Go to "Options/display/settings" and move the Target Frame Rate to Maximum.

I'm now getting 45-55 fps.

Posted: 10 Aug 2006, 13:58
by simtrac
I've had another play and I'm disappointed too. Maybe it's because its a beta, I don't know - and we won't know that unless we buy the final version. They seem to have overloaded the engine with too much stuff - plus I am worryingly reminded of both CFS3's cartoonish look and FS2000's stutters.

In parts, I have to say FS9 looks much better - esp with the ground textures.

Anyway. I'm meant to be working ...

Posted: 10 Aug 2006, 13:58
by jonesey2k
Looks like the servers are getting hammered. Im getting 10kbps from my 10mbit conection :lol:

I wont be buying till most of the add ons I have are supported and they have sorted most of the bugs.

And since when has any MS default plane had realistic flight dynamics? :lol:

Posted: 10 Aug 2006, 14:19
by Quixoticish
simtrac wrote:I've had another play and I'm disappointed too. Maybe it's because its a beta, I don't know - and we won't know that unless we buy the final version. They seem to have overloaded the engine with too much stuff - plus I am worryingly reminded of both CFS3's cartoonish look and FS2000's stutters.

In parts, I have to say FS9 looks much better - esp with the ground textures.

Anyway. I'm meant to be working ...
The stutters are infuriating.

Posted: 10 Aug 2006, 14:24
by jonesey2k
It will be interesting to see how their Baron compares with my DF version :smile:

Posted: 10 Aug 2006, 14:49
by Rick Piper
Hi Chris

yes thats easy.

proper FS9 model should have _T at the end of each texture name if there is shine.

M$ seem to have changed the coordinates standard for effects files :doh:

all my models seen to work to a degree.

Chipmunk has a strange centre of gravity problem.
Model before the new 748 with a VC need updating to the later FS9 standard but generally not too bad.

I'm peaved that all the shiney glass & specular material have changed yet again just like they did when FS9 came out.

But as you say most stuff works. (which i'm happy about).

flown it a little more and still think it's a slideshow.

Please everybody don't start telling me which of my models does work or what is wrong as i have tried them all and know what is wrong. :poke:
They are Free :smile:

Regards
Rick :wink:

My in progress channel stuff works great but all the fx files are screwed up :dunno:
Image
Hows that for a Classic Aircraft? :shock: