Twin Otter thoughts

[Guest SoarPics]

First off, Stewart, I take exception to your addressing fellow members here as hypocrits. That language is simply too strong.We're not talking here about a freeware product that someone has created without compensation and wishes to share with his/her fellow simmers. The Twotter is a commercial endeavor... the primary motivation of which is to generate revenue (and hopefully profit) for those presenting it. Whether a company like Lago created the product themselves or contracted it out is not an issue.And it is up to Lago to decide if and when the product is ready for release... not the consumer. If indeed Lago felt pressure from the community to release the product... before it was ready... then it falls on Lago to catch the grief from unhappy buyers. A commercial developer must stand strong on the matter of quality.I'm not here to bash Lago. But you, Stewart, need to keep site of the fact that it is ultimately the decision of the consumer whether or not the value is in the products we buy. The usually outstanding quality from many of the commercial developers make the stakes high. If a developer releases a product that a majority of the consumer base feels is inadequate, then it will be that developer who suffers. Business must work that way... otherwise it will be the consumer, as well as the business endeavors within this hobby, who suffer.I agree with your recommendation about being patient with regard to new releases. But ultimately many will buy (whether based on a review or recommendations from other buyers). And it still falls to the developer to make certain the product is ready for the public. If it isn't, then the developer should indeed hear from the people who paid their money.Regards,

[PaulVR 0]

Stewart,I don't know if you're referring to my post as being hypocrital. I never asked Lago when they were going to release the Twotter. I'd rather wait and get something extraordinary than have it NOW. When I buy a commercial product I just expect it to be up to certain standards. I'm not in the habit of buying impulsively. I did in this case, because I have a high regard for Lago's standards and quality. It's because I am a loyal customer (FS Traffic, FS Maintenance, a number of Terramesh sceneries, Emma field, FSSE) that I expected their usual standard of quality. I was disappointed this time, but I am confident that they will go out of their way to put things right. At the same time I am a bit apprehensive when I see Matthijs Kok waving away some problems (like the menu delay) with a flawed explanation, without seeming to want to investigate this further.Paul

[Guest sbdwag]

It kind of reminds me of the same mentality when ask if they were going to fix the Landing gears (not there plane is floating in the air) on the FSSE SP1 static plane. The answer was "I would cost a tremendous amount of time and money to fix it"Dennis

[Guest eko]

Try this for the menu delay.Open up the panel.cfg file in notepad, and scroll down to the virtual cockpit sections.Find the lines that say: pixel_size=xxxxxx being a sequence of two numbers.Change it so that it read thus: pixel_size=512,512If it already reads like that, then the problem is maybe with the gauge programming. (I don't have the otter, don't know what it actually says.)From the PR about a very crisp virtual cockpit, I am going to assume they are using very large bitmaps and probably have the pixel_size resolution cranked up way too high.Let me know if making the above change helps. (You will probably lose a little VC resolution, but it might be a tradeoff you want to make.)

[PaulVR 0]

Very good observation, Eko!It actually said "pixel_size=1024,1024s". I first thought removing the 's' might do the trick, but it didn't. When I changed to pixel_size=512,512 the delay went away, and I couldn't see any significant loss in clarity of the panel.Thanks for the tip!If anyone else wants to try this: pixel_size has to be changed in 3 different entries in the panel.cfg.Paul

[Guest eko]

I knew it. :-)This was something I encountered a long time ago when I couldn't get a VC to be crisp enough. Glad the logic works both ways.Spread the word, I've posted it in the LAGO forums, so maybe some folks will be able to use it there as well.

[Guest]

>LOL, you mean like the FSD Seneca which can be found for >free with better flight dynamics that the sad FSD creation? It does not suprise me you think that way. After all, flying a twin model like the FSD SV is way above your little dumb skill.

[Guest]

>>I prefer Dreamfleet's technique of photo/computer graphics for the >cockpit panel and VC.>>Do me a favor and count the number of gauges of the DF >Cardinal VC and the ones in the seneca. I guess if you do a >Seneca VC with the same amount of gauges noone would be >willing to take teh framerate hit. The Seneca is a much more >complex plane.Unfortunately, that's what people did not realize yet.

[MeatWater 2]

>- the engine sounds like a lawn mower. I'm not qualified >though to judge if this is correct or not.Hmmm, funny how people gasp for realism and then complain about listening to "the real thing". To you and anybody else: that's the way this thing sounds - I too have come to hear beefier engines :)Oh..and...could you provide a picture of your lawnmower please?------------MeatWaterProfessional Audio 4 Entertainmenthttp://www.meatwater.com