Whats the fuss about gMax?

[ejoiner 21]

Hey Finn...nice to see you around these parts!Eric

[Guest]

Well Finn, perhaps I should clarify, because I guess the logic does seem strange if you read my first post. The reason I prefer GMAX is because, as textures are a part of the aircraft, a great model can be ruined by utterly disgusting textures. Of course, thats more of an outside influence, but it hits the bone for me when a great model has inferior textures, and that can easily drive me away.Of course, modelwise besides them seeming a little cartoonish when they come from GMAX, usually I can't tell the difference.Scott

[Guest]

I wasn't willing to learn gmax either as long as I thought I had to enter lat/long for each building. As soon as fsregen was made so that I could turn gmax models into library objects, this objection vaporized. yeehaw! time to learn the new tool.C'mon, haven't you also, in a moment of frustration, CURSED fsds for lack of a zoom feature in the part or polygon textureing window?Gmax lets you get to the point of being able to consiously select texture map down to the pixel. Gmax modelling features of boolean subtraction, extrudes, edge bevels, edge cuts...hard to beat.I LOVED fsds during its time and it took so time to pry me away, and gmax does have some bugs, but once you figure out the workarounds, its better.And did I read that you are dreaming of asd update? For heavens sake, why? ASD was released before there was a valid competition from the freeware marketplace. FSSC is already way beyond ASD and its FREE. Airport is also way beyond ASD. Why would anyone pay money for an assembly gui today?B

[Guest Scott Campbell]

Bob,The key item of A&SD that I absolutely love is the ability to read the FS BGL files. That way I can place items exactly where I want them in relation to what's in FS. I put in lakes and extra waterways and roads and resort buildings and houses and hotels and trees and everything I need for my resort area very quickly and precisely, not to mention cities. Remember, A&SD is also SD - Scenery Design. It's not all about airports.The other plus with A&SD reading BGL files is the "Import" feature. I can import navaids, roads, and especially airports. With this I can delete everything but the tarmacs and fix the "bleed-through" problem. Also, I can place a precise airport ploy which adds flattening capability, thus remove other problems at default airports.With overlaying, I can fix other issues or add other things at default airports like my GuardRail Cargo Systems buildings at KSJC, along with the new longer runway right whre they should be. I don't have to go into FS over and over and over to see if it's right.As far as I've ever seen, Airport does none of this. I would have to find and load in a map, and that's not what's in FS.I haven't played with FSSC yet so don't know its features.

[badderjet 181]

WOW now THAT's great 'graphic'!!! :-eek Does your friend have a website, I'd like to see a bit more of his obviously outstanding work... :-)ThanksEtienne

[Guest]

Scott, thanks for replying, and I'll grant you the reading and import of bgl was a unique function. Now...the $64 question, doesn't the ASD2.1 do this just fine as is? I've used it in 2k2, and it worked fine.We have a different focus, which is why I overlooked that function. I've never found anything in the default that I was willing to keep, but I tend to focus on a given airport, not so much on general spruce up of a region. I also work with only photoreal terrain textures, which means that working over a photobackground is needed, the references ASD gives you to work with no longer work.Ur right, I don't know of any package that's inluded the import function...wonder why, it can't be that hard...Cheers,Bob Bernstein

[Guest Scott Campbell]

Bob,With my fully-stocked Scottland Resort area, I am getting 1-2 fps where I got 10-12 in 2K, and even really paired down, the best I get is 4. So the transfer to 2K2 isn't working well for me, even with alterations for 2K2. 2K2 just doesn't support SCASM macros at all well, and 2K4 won't support them at all.So I'm in need of finding something else. Preferably something that's as easy to lay out as in A&SD with the import and BGL-read features.

[Guest]

{non-designer speaking}I'm surprised no-one has mentioned the more powerful interaction between the visual model and the sim.For instance, prior to Gmax, all animations were hard coded into the model. If something didn't work quite right, the model needed to be modified via the source files. If the flaps didn't exteng to the right position, or if the landing gear sequenced to fast or slow, the model had to be fixed with FSDS or AA. In a Gmax plane, if a part is named "Landing gear" or "Flaps" (or whatever the actual parts are tagged), the sim "knows" that these are the actual parts, rather that just a visual event that happenes to be triggered with the "G" key. If the gear or spoilers extend too fast, or if the flaps extend too steeply, they can be adjusted in the aircraft.cfg. This is the same reason gear and props show up on AI planes -- because FS2002 sees them as actual parts instead of a few random polygons. And when your wing hits the ground, it knows which part of the model to break off.{/non-designer speaking}

[Guest]

Hmmm, interesting idea. I'll give it a look.Mike Stone

[Guest]

I'm not with you either Scott. :-) I've used both packages quite a bit, and I can achieve identical results with either. I can build a very realistic airplane in either, or I can build a "cartoon" plane in either. The realism of the plane depends much more on the efforts of the designer, than on which tool was used. Mike Stone

[Guest]

>Hey Finn...nice to see you around these parts! >>Eric Hello there Eric!Last I heard you'd been hit by a train ;-) - good to see you're still painting planes after the experience! I haven't really been up to that much recently, but that should change soon...Have funFinn

[Guest]

Tim, I'd be greatly interested in a nice detailed KPVD. I've takena stab at upgrading or making new scenery for the airport, butone thing I've always run into is the lack of good photosof how the terminal building looks. Its a pretty modernlooking bulding and I think even with a good set of picturesit would be difficult to model. Consider how the multi-levelroads go in front of the terminal building... and the roofand lighting might be tricky to model too. The rest of the airport wouldn't be too hard though.. prettybasic stuff. MattP.S.: I work less than 1 mile from KPVD and I can sit frommy desk and watch planes take off or approach when they areusing the cross wind runway. Not much gets done on thosedays :)>THe complexity of Gmax is realted to the fact that it is >essentially 3dstudio. I admittedly am not a 3d modeler, but >I'm abnout to embark on doing my first airport upgrade >(KPVD, if you are interested) We'll see how detailed it >looks :) >>Tim

[Guest cwright]

>It can be as smooth as the creator wishes to make it, >provided they develop their own keyframe sequence, and not >rely on the defaults provided via makemdl.exe Bill, could you elaborate on that? How exactly could I make the undercarriage animation smoother? Best regards, Chris

[Guest cwright]

Besides >that, there just is nothing intuitive about gMAX to me. It >just makes no sense. It's like a hodgepodge of stuff all >slapped together with no flow or logic. Scott, Maybe it appears that way to you because you're so used to FSDS! I can only say that, for me, the Gmax user interface is superb, being powerful, flexible and very elegant - and it looks pretty, too! I just can't imagine going back to the FSDS interface, which is essentially identical to Imagine, a program that came out many, many years ago.>>And the thought of manually having to enter in the lat/lon, >altitude, and direction or each and every object just makes >me cringe. :-erks Without a map, and simple click and >placement, it's just not something I'm going to do. > The makemdl interface is very, very poor. Having to enter coordinates like that is just ridiculous, particularly as you have to re-enter them each time you re-compile (but Chris File's MiddleMan helps a lot here). However, using fsregen you can convert Gmax objects to library objects. It's then easy to convert to an API you can use in Airport etc. But why Microsoft didn't allow Gmax to generate API's directly is beyond me. I sometimes think they live on a different planet.... Best regards, Chris Wright