FTX Global 1.2 is out but...

[N1G 88]

Uh Oh LOL. This is beginning to look like the XP forum did about a year ago.

 

Bob

[alainneedle1 97]

Really? I haven't seen that/those threads. Maybe you can post a link to it/them?

 

Or is it that P3D2 doesn't meet your hardcore simmer needs, so you must go out and attack it at every opportunity? :ph34r:

 

Since you asked, some have changed their mind a little since then.

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/428124-wow/

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/427768-jaw-dropping/

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/427186-p3d-20-my-first-day/

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/427257-day-2-im-a-believer/

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/428255-p3d-is-gorgeous/

[RWFeldman 159]

Uh Oh LOL. This is beginning to look like the XP forum did about a year ago.

 

Bob

As long as it doesn't get like the FLIGHT forum was, probably be alright.

[ChaoticBeauty 6,692]

That is just wonderful...You trashed two different Dev's in one sentence and you sir are just guessing...You don't have a clue.

 

Edit...just looked at you equipment...man you really don't get it!!

 

What are you talking about? I didn't say anything bad towards those developers, and I wasn't guessing. I was just asking if FTX Global indeed does cause OOMs, or if it is another add-on that does this.

 

What does my PC have to do with this?

[Alan_A 1,650]

Interesting ... I'll have to try and test volumetric fog On/Off again -- I tested this early on (day 1 of release) and didn't notice a difference with Volumetric fog on or off ... and I've done plenty of video's with lots of clouds/ligthening ... cloud draw distance will make a slight impact -- going from 80mi to 110mi I get about 2 fps hit.  But will give it another test tonight.

 

Well, this is most definitely interesting.  I just uninstalled FTX Global, then tested with volumetric fog on and off, using the Maule with the Major Thunerstorms theme over Washington DC.  The result?  I barely took any framerate hit when volumetric fog was enabled.  With frames locked at 33, I maintained 33 without volumetric fog.  With volumetric fog switched on, frames came down as low as 29, but mainly held between 30 and 33.  So a minimal difference.

 

Now I'm wondering whether the volumetric fog problem is in fact a volumetric-fog-plus-FTX Global problem.  I'd like to go back to previous threads and see how many of us who were struggling with frames in heavy cloudcover had FTX Global installed as opposed to default.

 

Other findings from today's test - I still had to trade off between cloudcover and shadows.  Cockpit shadows are fine, but adding terrain shadows produced microstutters, even without cockpit shadows enabled.  I also had to keep both special effects sliders on low to avoid microstuttering.  Finally, volumetric fog with default weather themes produced that "shower curtain" haze layer effect - close to the ground, you can see a vertical plane of haze swallowing up the buildings, or backing away from them.

 

But the bottom line from my tests seems to be, "ORBX, we've had a problem."  I wonder if this is just something on my system, or if others can replicate it.

[mganz121 159]

 

 

I think it's going to take some time before the add-on developers start to release products that are natively compatible with P3Dv2.  This isn't really anyone's fault; it should almost be expected given the changes that have taken place.

 

I have seen it for the past 30 years. Each time change comes along, there is a crowd that are quick to criticise the core developer and also appear to have little regard for what is required for the 3rd party developers in order to to bring their products into line. The problem is that we live in a society where many people want and expect it now and are quick to show their frustration!

 

I've looked at some of the Avsim "join dates" for some of those who have been quick to criticise and that in itself can be quite telling. Yep, I've got three sims on my pc and they are all fun in their own way. This hobby just gets better and better.

[mganz121 159]

Since you asked, some have changed their mind a little since then.

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/428124-wow/

 

etc

 Good grief Alain, I thought you had dropped off the face of the earth. Either that or locked in your room quietly investigating P3Dv2?  :lol:

[styckx 1,870]

Random off topic question..

 

Is the forum text randomly turning all bold for anyone else when they reload it?  I know it's not just me but my tech OCD won't be 100% convinced till I see someone else say "yes".

 

lol

[Brian Doney 127]

 

MS Flight had no deal breaking bugs at launch. v2 is full of them..  I have zero tolerance for the current trend of "Fork over your money, hit a wall of bugs and wait for a patch" software distribution.  Gaming companies are notorious for it and sadly it seems LM is no different. 

 

 

Well then maybe Bill it's time for you to move on ?

 

Your posts of late are bordering on schizophrenic, on the one hand stating how you will be here to support LM once a patch is released, and then posting ridiculously naive statements like the above.

 

Some of you really need to grow up a little. P3D isn't now, has never been, and never will be about us. This has been known and should come as no surprise to anyone. Reporting issues and trying to help move the project along are one thing, but some of you honestly do nothing but whine, and I literally mean whine, like a child would, when you find any part of P3D that doesn't meet your individual needs.

 

That level of narcissism is something also typically reserved for children.

 

The most interesting thing, to me anyway, is how few of you have posted, or likely even registered if we're honest, over at the LM forums, boldly underlining how the childish whining is intended to be pointless and of zero worth.

 

Some say they are tired of modern software development practices, well, I'm tired of the passive-aggressive approach so many supposedly grown men and women take to "solving" problems. This community has an opportunity, no matter how small, to actually shape the course of future development of the platform, in a way we've never before been able. 

 

Is this really what you intend to do with it ? Crying about your flipping Orbx ?  :unknw:

 

Queue more complaining about how such and such didn't pay to be a beta tester in 3...2...1...

[alainneedle1 97]

 Good grief Alain, I thought you had dropped off the face of the earth. Either that or locked in your room quietly investigating P3Dv2?  :lol:

 

I got another time out for saying what everybody already know in secret.

 

In fact I was (since I had time) investigating P3D and other stuff......a good friend of mine got P3D and asked me to test it with him, and we tested it a lot, 2 titan in SLI, and we disabled one card as P3D does not use SLI + a GTX 780Ti for comparisons, he also has the CPU and RAMS to push these cards... conclusions.....P3D was in no way ready for released, I have never seen a released with so many problems (bugs), don't take my word for it, just look at how many thread here at Avsim (or on other forums) are talking about major problems, does P3D run with sliders to the left, yes but who want to do that? 

 

Should we talk about add on compatibility....what a mess.

 

First let me say that I have nothing against P3D, to each his own, but lets be honest with each others here, if that was a brand new released from a new company we'd never heard of nobody here would give them the time of days about their product with that kind of problems at released, everybody would have threads like "Please stay away from this product", so why are so many peoples here believing that P3D is the future, just ask the same peoples how much money they have already invested in FSX add on and you'll get your answer.  

 

Who's really pushing P3D....3PD maybe?

[Arwen 289]

 

 

First let me say that I have nothing against P3D, to each his own, but lets be honest with each others here, if that was a brand new released from a new company we'd never heard of nobody here would give them the time of days about their product with that kind of problems at released, everybody would have threads like "Please stay away from this product", so why are so many peoples here believing that P3D is the future, just ask the same peoples how much money they have already invested in FSX add on and you'll get your answer.

 

I for one, have always been totally honest about my experience with P3D, as I have been about every other flightsim (and every game) I have ever owned. My honesty about MS Flight actually got me in trouble here. And I really don't care who makes the sim. What I care about is if they are in this for the long haul, and if they are willing to listen to me when something doesn't seem to be working as it should.

 

Yes, I get that P3D is far from perfect, but I'm honestly having very few problems with it and it is running VERY well on my computer (MUCH better than even the 64-bit version of X-Plane 10). I own both FSX (along with hundreds of dollars in addons) and X-Plane 10, and now P3D2, so what have I to gain by "claiming" that I prefer P3D2 over all the other flightsims I have used?  

 

This could be due primarily to the specific system you are running the sim on (which is also a major issue for high-end games), plus I really believe that many users are doing way too much in-sim tweaking (which seems to cause problems in this version), and I figured out early that there are very few addons that are actually fully compatible yet (the important word here is 'yet').  Since day one, I have reported any issues that I've had with P3D2 on LM's support forum, so that the developer is aware that there are specific things that will result in an instant CTD, and other things that will result in an OOM error.

 

But people here need to take a breath and have just a little faith that LM (and 3rd party developers) are working to fix these bugs, and most of you need to have a little patience, as it is going to take some time to figure out and solve many of the problems (either by LM or by the addon developers).

 

P3D is not some kind of evil conspiracy, and just because you might be having major issues with this version, that that doesn't mean that anyone (like me) who post that they are not having major issues, has to be misrepresenting the truth (for some unknown, and diabolical reason). 

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

+1

 

[styckx 1,870]

I agree Arwen.. Deep breath.. It will all work out, I do have faith in LM. Some of us have different ways of expressing ourselves.. Matter of fact I have my CC in hand and about to re-purchase..   Too close to the holidays for this drama.

[KingGhidorah 209]

  Too close to the holidays for this drama.

 

Aren't the holidays when the drama and bickering is supposed to begin? :lol:

[Highiron 21]

I find it rather interesting reading all the posts about problems with P3Dv2. Some objective, others with hostility, and some rather like little children throwing a tantrum.

 

Given the thousands of different systems and configurations out in computer land that this platform will run on, how can L.M. guarantee there will be no problems with all of them? Even with beta testers, they will be lucky if they even encounter 1% of the possibilities. From low end laptops to over the top PC systems. Think about this and how likely 100% problem free operation will be.

 

People have no patience with software, their computers, or themselves. Many people complaining are the architects of their own problems. Some installed P3Dv2 and immediately edited the .cfg file with all the old FSX tweaks before even trying the simulator first with a raw .cfg file. They are under the misinformation that P3Dv2 is nothing more than a beefed up FSX, not realizing that old FSX tweaks can actually do more harm than good to P3Dv2, and that major changes have occurred in the rendering engine code. For this error, they will blame L.M.

 

People read P3Dv2 will put more work on the GPU and use multiple cores more effectively on their CPU. This immediately implies one can crank all the sliders to the right because for once a simulator can finally utilize all the power under the hood of their 5 year old computer build. For this error, they will blame L.M.

 

People in all their excitement, like the first night with their new bride, hastily start installing all their FSX/P3Dv1 favorite aircraft and scenery only to realize the excitement is over all too quickly rather than taking it slowly and seeing exactly what it can and can not do. For this error, they will blame L.M. and 3PDs.

 

I challenge anyone to install P3Dv2 on their computer, leave the sliders and .cfg file alone, select a default aircraft and find the massive glowing errors outside a few current known issues. They just won't be there for most users I'm afraid.

 

All the add on material we are trying to use was made and intended for FSX. Not a single product has been made exclusively for P3Dv2 or to take full advantage of its potential as of date. If it was, it would not be compatible with FSX, simple as that. Even the default aircraft are FSX native in their initial inception. Since the majority of users are still using FSX, this will prove a challenge. If a product is made compatible for FSX and P3Dv2, it will likely not be optimized to take advantage of P3Dv2 capabilities but more sales will be made. If a product is made compatible for only P3Dv2, it will likely perform very well, but will not be compatible with FSX resulting is less sales. This whole issue was experienced with the release of FSX after FS9, why should it be any different with FSX to P3Dv2? Since P3Dv2 is a much larger step, this will require two complete and separate products for each platform. Not an easy situation for developers both on time and monetary resources.

 

Orbx material was made and designed for FSX compatibility. It uses DX9, not DX10 or DX11. I would be almost willing to wager that if Orbx made FTX Global 100% native to P3Dv2 there would be no issues and it would look amazing. Remember, there is not a single add on utilizing DX11 yet for P3Dv2. This move however to the benefit of the P3Dv2 user would render the software useless in FSX. I believe the challenge for Orbx will to be ensure their products are compatible with P3Dv2 and pushing it's capabilities whilst at the same time not destroying backward compatibility with FSX. This is deja vu all over again.

 

Before we start to weigh in on the value of P3Dv2 over FSX, perhaps in fairness, we should ensure that we are comparing apples to apples if those testing or comparing want to ensure integrity in their findings and quality of data that actually can be repeated by all and measured. Comparing FSX with all native and optimized material for that platform to P3Dv2 with that same FSX material is junk science. Rather compare it to P3Dv2 native and optimized material and compare the results, that's sound measurement. But wait! We can't do that yet because it doesn't exist does it...

 

Given these facts, why do people persist to blame L.M. for issues that resulted from making a better platform than what we had? Why do some slam down hard on developers who's products don't function optimally in P3Dv2 when they were never designed and optimized for it in the first place? Do we want products that work in FSX, but are not optimized for P3Dv2, or do we want products that are optimized for P3Dv2 but won't work in FSX. We can not have both without separate products. This is a dilemma we must choose as well as developers. FSX DX9 material is castrating P3Dv2 so why do individuals expect it to perform better than the FSX material was designed for. We are still putting lip stick on a pig. When P3Dv2 native and exclusive aircraft, scenery, and weather are used, let's then make those comparisons and see what comes out on top and which has the greater stability and less issues. Then, and only then, will we have that apples to apples comparison. For now and the near future I believe there will have to be a compromise that we will have to endure through, until FSX usage starts to become the exception and not the norm.