Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

baby_fan

PMDG737 windshield rain effects

Recommended Posts

I feel as if PMDG should sticky a topic at the top of every forum, titled "things we will not do"

 

1. No wx radar

2. No rain animation in the NGX

3. No folding wings

4. No wingtips for the -600

5. No 757/767

6. No A380

 

and so on...they could save themselves all the repeated requests and unnecessary duplicate threads.

 

Yeah that would be a good idea, although I am sure some people would miss the sticky and still ask anyway, but at least people could just point them to that thread and save some time. You need to add no more development for FS9 to the list as well.

 

 

Sean Campbell


Avsim Board of Directors | Avsim Forums Moderator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PMDG will NOT trade function for looks, EVER.


Name available upon request


AVSIMSig.jpg


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WELL IF PEOPLE KEEP BRINGING IT UP...WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU??....ITS A WANTED EFFECT!!..

 

It can be done in fsx..It is possible.RealAir managed it.

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/371355-rain-on-windshield/page__st__25#entry2346853

 

His ryan comment on the rain effect take notice what he says at the end


I7-800k,Corsair h1101 cooler ,Asus Strix Gaming Intel Z370 S11 motherboard, Corsair 32gb ramDD4,    2  ssd 500gb 970 drive, gtx 1080ti Card,  RM850 power supply

 

Peter kelberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PMDG will NOT trade function for looks, EVER.

 

Actually, occasionally they will do that; read the 747-8 product page on the PMDG website. It's not a crime, many people were happy to see them do so: 'This product is not intended to simulate the difference in flight characteristics between the 747-400 and the 747-8. This product allows the user to add a high fidelity visual model of the 747-8 to their Flight Simulator X experience.'

 

Al


Alan Bradbury

Check out my youtube flight sim videos: Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel as if PMDG should sticky a topic at the top of every forum, titled "things we will not do"

 

1. No wx radar

2. No rain animation in the NGX

3. No folding wings

4. No wingtips for the -600

5. No 757/767

6. No A380

 

and so on...they could save themselves all the repeated requests and unnecessary duplicate threads.

 

+1


Best regards

Cristiano Mueller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan, where have they traded in any functionality in that project? The model doesn't do anything less in the -8 version than it did in the -400 version. So although they made a visual extension, they did not trade any functionality for something cosmetic in the process.

Whether or not the model is still correct, which it isn't for the -8, is an entirely different discussion.


Name available upon request


AVSIMSig.jpg


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was planned entirely from the start to be a visual upgrade only. Picking & choosing options in a base product is a little more involved & requires a lot of judgement.

 

Does anyone know how many animations are required to get a good rain effect? It could mean losing a lot of our "on the fly" options & require reloading the plane any time we change something in the configuration. Ie... Changing from Honeywell to Collins mcp requires an animation, as does enabling or disabling the HGS, anything that appears or disappears requires at least one animation.


Kenneth Weir

My Saitek yoke mod

 

i7 2600k @ 4.7

8GB Gskill CAS7

2x GTX580 SLI Surround + GT520 Accessory

Win7x64

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the -600 doesn't have winglets so I don't think I've seen anybody on this forums asking for it. To provide a bit more explanation to the original poster.....

FSX removed the traditional way of rendering rain effects in the VC as a animated texture. This was how it worked in FS9 but for some reason it was removed in FSX. Developers got around this by introducting an animated polygon with a texture on it. The problem is FSX has a limit on animations. So things like flaps, VC switches, throttles and such all take up animations. In the case of the NGX, they modelled the cockpit environment so completely that there was little or no animations 'left' to allow for a rain effect. The J41 is an example of how the rain effect is implemented inFSX on aircraft that hadn't reached this animation limit. The raineffect is not just one single animation either, so you can't just get rid of one thing. It varies by aircraft speed and all those unique animations need to be created. Perhaps with a model not as coex it would have been possible but PMDG is focused on simulating the procedures and operations of the aircraft not just the visual aspects of it.

 

Hopefully this is a good explanation.

 

To add to this, if I remember correctly, that is also why the cockpit windows cannot be opened (although they were originally intended to be, there were other animated functions that had higher priority, so the window opening was 'dropped')


PMDG-777-EK-SIG-MAY1713-2_zps6f2ed2be.pn
 

Chidiebere Anyahara

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, every time you ask for the rain effect, search the forums for the number of topics involving the words "low fps", "low performance" etc. Double that number because only 50% of people report their problems. The number you get in the end is equal to the number of words "NO" you will get for rain effect. I agree it looks nice, but I can live with the fact that it is not going to happen.


rs.png Vladimir Levkov / Владимир Левков

Two miles of road can take you two miles.Two miles of runway can take you anywhere in the world

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know how many animations are required to get a good rain effect? It could mean losing a lot of our "on the fly" options & require reloading the plane any time we change something in the configuration. Ie... Changing from Honeywell to Collins mcp requires an animation, as does enabling or disabling the HGS, anything that appears or disappears requires at least one animation.

 

That's exactly what it means - all the options switching, the HGS, the volumetric lights etc - that all counts against the animation limit. We're not going to disable things that are actually useful for flying the airplane in favor of some streaks across the window.


Ryan Maziarz
devteam.jpg

For fastest support, please submit a ticket at http://support.precisionmanuals.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest dlrk

To be perfectly honest, I'd rather have a rain effect than on-the-fly options switching.

 

Given all the demand perhaps......?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darrol I check you myself as preffering this setup and raise you PMDG team who decided they liked this enough to actually put it in in the first place.

 

Guys,

the 777 has quite a bit less options than the 737, so there is some chance yet... just accept the fact that if there is something actually functional that would take the animations, it will be prefered.


--Peter Fabian 
RTFM.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is it that will not allow you to comprehend the fact that it is simply, not needed, I am pretty sure no matter how much it is preached here there will still be requests.

I say needed, because as you know ; there is a thin line separating wanted versus needed


Regards,
Jamaljé Bassue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is it that will not allow you to comprehend the fact that it is simply, not needed, I am pretty sure no matter how much it is preached here there will still be requests.

I say needed, because as you know ; there is a thin line separating wanted versus needed

 

Where do you draw the line with what is needed? Do you really need a thousand lighting options of dimming and contrast for gauges and panels?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest dlrk

The thing that's really not needed is on the fly switching, I'd be just as happy with it in a config manager

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...