Archived

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

Jason Howell

For those who think My Traffic X AI models are inferior...

Recommended Posts

I was slewing around Sydney, Australia trying to get some decent shots of AI when i noticed this Embraer coming in for a landing. So i zip over there to get in a good position and capture these two shots.

 

 

 

the second shot is what got my attention..note how the AI put the brakes on...ive never really noticed this in a AI plane before.

 

 

 

It made me smile :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

All respect to your post and photos, I find that UT2 has much more realistic models.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All respect to your post and photos, I find that UT2 has much more realistic models.

 

...especially since you can easily switch out UT2 models for your favorites. Still waiting on the process for switching out models/paints in MT. I asked twice in a previous thread and all I got were a bunch of responses about good FPS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, not trying to reduce the importance of your findings, but even freeware Word of Ai had the brake animations for many years now. And yes, mytraffic models are really ugly for today standards imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, not trying to reduce the importance of your findings, but even freeware Word of Ai had the brake animations for many years now. And yes, mytraffic models are really ugly for today standards imo.

And what exactly are "today's standards"? For the most part of a flight simulator session, you should be inside the virtual cockpit, not looking at other planes. AI is only there to make the experience more real, imo, not to make it pretty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the AIA and FruitStand models are mutch more accurate, just compare a AIA 737-800 with a mytrafic model to see what i´m talking about (That´s your answer about today standards). And about your other afirmation, although it´s a bit dubious about the real/pretty comparison, i fly from the VC and don´t use any traffic. I was just replying to the OP about the brake animation and that mytraffic models are endeed ugly. There are mutch better ones available (Even for free).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...especially since you can easily switch out UT2 models for your favorites. Still waiting on the process for switching out models/paints in MT

 

why would you need to swap out paints when you have damn near every airline that flies in the package already?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here is a list of every aircraft and airline in MyTraffic X 5.4a professional. In response to an earlier post that new version of MTX that was just released is the same as 5.4a pro, but just sold under aerosofts name. Nothing has changed to the core program. Another feature of MTX 5.4a that alot of people dont even know it has is the ability to go back in time and fly in the 1960's to today with the airlines that flew in that era. Wanna fly with pan am and TWA as your AI? you can go back to any date from today back to 1960.

 

HERE is a list of every airline/aircraft that you get with MTX 5.4a Professional. This is why i dont have to spend my time installing paints and models, i dont feel i have to because nearly every airline i could care about is in the package already. People state the models arent complex, but honestly they dont have to be, THEY ARE AI. More polys in ai planes means a bigger drag on fps because the sim has to spend more time rendering AI planes. This means you can have more AI out there than you could for say UT2 or other AI packages. I also own UT2 but i dont use it. MTX has replaced it for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fly from VC with AI. I construct my traffic files from the flightplans created by groups like AIG etc and use AIA, The Fruit stand, DJC, UTT, HTAI and FAIB etc who produce excellent AI aircraft. They look realistic with reverse thrust, spoliers and flaps. Looking at the pics at teh top, that AI model just looks cheap and nasty in comparison.

 

Just my opinion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MTX could have every airline known to man and it wouldn't matter to me. I would cringe every time I was at an airport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say this about UT2. The FPS hit is not bad. The planes look great. And it just works. But glad others like MT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"it has is the ability to go back in time and fly in the 1960's to today with the airlines that flew in that era"

 

I checked the list of airlines and it dosn't have CP Air. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't fault either program. They both have their strengths and weaknesses, so comparing the two should be done so in an objective way. UT2 has beautiful models. MTX has wonderful airline/schedule coverage, and seems to give denser traffic. MTX covers Europe more thoroughly, also, if that's your need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have also noticed that no one has mentioned that you can use UT2 and MTX5.4A together. I use MTX to cover airlines, cargo and military that UT2 does not. Best of both worlds. Both have there strength and weaknesses, so both are great in my book. But this method does come at a cost, long as you don't mind purchasing both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have MTXpro and have to be honest, I am really disappointed at SOME of the AI models. They really are very poor. Unsure where they have come from, because if I'm unfortunate enough to taxi past one, then it spoils the immsersion factor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be clear, having good looking AI aircraft does not NECESSARILY mean they have a big impact on FPS if they are designed properly - quite the contrary, AI Aardvark [the original quality AI provider and still the one with the widest range of models] used to have as it's motto "It's all about the frame rates" [or was it "It's all about the polygons"?].

 

I'm no model builder but I think for example they put great effort into ensuring that the only polygons in their models were the ones you could see - with sloppy designs it's possible to have polygons inside the model on back surfaces etc which aren't visible but are still rendered by FS.

 

OK, as PC specifications have improved and frame rates have become a bit less critical, they've moved away from that somewhat towards higher quality but they are NOT frame rate hogs.

 

Secondly, if you don't use My Traffic or Ultimate Traffic, there is NO need to start writing your own flightplans etc etc. World 0f AI provide 400 packages for live airlines comprising flightplans, models & repaints plus another 100 for bankrupt & otherwise defunct airlines [doesn't that tell you something about the airline industry?]. Each of those takes seconds to install. I use Ultimate GA to bulk that up with quality bizjets & bizprops and that operates in a similar way.

 

If you want to get payware AI, that's fine, your decision and your money. I think you're wasting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me or is that ERJ deploying speed breaks on its Horizontal stabilizers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why would you need to swap out paints when you have damn near every airline that flies in the package already?

 

Because the MT models are bad. Also, does MT have all of the special paint schemes and apply the different variations when airlines are transitioning to new liveries? For example, during the UA/CO Merger and the NWA/DAL merger, I went in to UT2 periodically and reduced the number of paints for the old airline. Eventually, all paints were transitioned to DAL and UA and/or new schedules were released by UT.

 

Of course, you can't do this with vanilla UT2 but it is easy to add in paints. So I ask again, what is the process for swapping out models and paints in MT?

 

I have also noticed that no one has mentioned that you can use UT2 and MTX5.4A together. I use MTX to cover airlines, cargo and military that UT2 does not. Best of both worlds. Both have there strength and weaknesses, so both are great in my book. But this method does come at a cost, long as you don't mind purchasing both.

 

That's the reason I keep asking the same question that is going unanswered. I'm not trying to promote UT2 over MT, I am trying to find out how MT works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say this about UT2. The FPS hit is not bad. The planes look great. And it just works. But glad others like MT.

 

That all depends upon your system. On my Q9550 oc'ed to 3.4GHz, the frame rate hit is about 10-12 fps at 50% traffic settings sitting at KARR (Aurora), which is about 50 miles west of KORD (O'Hare).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man i got people fired up over this....

 

Ok i prefer frame rate over having too much of a stutter when i go into a big hub. It has been my personal experience with UT2 and MyTraffic X that MTX performs better and thats what works for me. AI traffic is still the red headed stepchild of FSX as it is still the new kid on the block when it comes to visuals. I remember 5.1 and seeing that crude looking AI and when i see a MTX or UT model i smile inside knowing how far we have come. UT2 has features MTX dont. And i honestly dont care if my AI flys "real flight plans" along routes and such. Im too busy worrying about my plane and my route. Regardless of which product you choose, anything is better than default.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What got people 'fired up' Jason, was your provocative choice of words for the title of your post ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

true...but i liked what i saw...but to be honest i havent seen UT2 models do the same. I remember it wasnt so long ago the holy grail of AI traffic was to get the AI to use 2 runways at big airports. I suppose now the holy grail is to get the little copilot models in the ai planes to wave at the person taking the screenshot as they are turning onto the runway. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why would you need to swap out paints when you have damn near every airline that flies in the package already?

 

UT2 is missing more airliner colour schemes than it really should do. Adding various WoAI airline packages into UT2 has made a HUGE difference to my airports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites