Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Eric

FS2004 autogen and patch

Recommended Posts

Guest Zevious Zoquis

Nope. See, before the patch setting it to 20 or 21 had no effect. Now it does. Thats one thing the patch does is enable those higher resolutions so that now they actually work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cwright

When the autogen problem first emerged a year ago I did quite a few measurements on the off-distances for these autogen objects. As we know all too well, the off distances were ridiculously high, for example telegraph poles were visible at just over twenty miles! I repeated a few tests after applying the patch to a virgin FS installation (don't ask - I had big problems with the patch that forced a re-install). Here are a few off distances in miles compared to the pre-patch values:Object '''''' off distance,pre-patch '' off distance, patchedRoad sign '''''''''' 23 '''''''''''''''''''' 7.3Fast food (chicken)' 20 '''''''''''''''''''' 7.8Power station '''''' 24 '''''''''''''''''''' 8.1 The patched values are much more sensible - but they're still too large. If you scan a city at very high zoom you'll still see that the distant objects are dominated by the autogen objects. The on distances are virtually the same. I also checked frame rates at Los Angeles. I slewed across for some distance, checked the frame rate and then flushed the autogen objects and checked the frame rate again. Autogen objects can be flushed simply by changing the autogen density setting and then returning it to the original value. These are the typical frame rates: After slewing '''' after flushing '''' ratio '''' 10 ''''''''''''''''' 15 ''''''''''' 1.5 '''' 13.2 ''''''''''''''' 17 ''''''''''' 1.29 '''' 17.8 ''''''''''''''' 23.5 ''''''''' 1.32 '''' 14.6 ''''''''''''''' 18.8 ''''''''' 1.29 Typically the frame rate is about 30% higher after flushing. This indicates that there is an accumulation of unwanted objects. As the on and off distances are virtually the same with the patch, the explanation for this isn't obvious. I think these measurements confirm some observations made in this thread, that there is some improvement but the problem is still there. Before the patch the measured ratio was sometimes almost 2, that is, after flushing the frame rate nearly doubled. My conclusion is that Microsoft has indeed improved things, but the basic problem is still there. That is a bit disappointing. Any chance of a patch for the patch? Best regards, Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cwright

Jimmi, yes, as you say, there is an improvement but the problem is still there. I give some measurements in my other post.... Best regards, Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL I'm sorry but reading your post, it looked like a pagan ritual :-lolSacrifice one goat and three chickensAt the crack of dawn, fly four circles counter-clockwiseFly for ten minutes to the south, then for ten minutes to the northhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/94166.jpgThis bug sure it confusing sometimes:)


Asus Prime X370 Pro / Ryzen 7 3800X / 32 GB DDR4 3600 MHz / Gainward Ghost RTX 3060 Ti
MSFS / XP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest _patrol_

Well, after installing the patch I don't even get the default.xml autogen objects. I installed using the origional fs9.exe, the updated .exe installed, the dates of the .dll's are correct, so what happened? During installation I got a warning that display.cfg had changed but everything else went fine. My FPS around KSFO plunged to single digits where as before they stayed above 20. I "fixed" this by changing Autogen from max to normal, but now of course get a lot less autogen. I do like the new bridges though. Any ideas on what I should try next would be greatly appreciated.ThanksDavidedit: I just looked in scenerygenerictextures and all the .bmp's are there, but none of the default.xml stuff displays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>LOL I'm sorry but reading your post, it looked like a pagan ritual :-lolYes, :-lol As stated, I came home late last night, which means I also wwas drunk (only a little bit off course ;-) ). Otherwise I would not have flown back and forth for an hour or so. :-).Anyway, the results of my test are correct!Wolfgang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cwright

David, I had a similar problem. I had modified display.cfg to make fog work correctly on my ATI 9200. The patch reported that display.cfg was a problem and installation would be terminated - but it carried on and completed anyway. But there were serious problems and FS didn't run. Eventually I had to re-install FS. Then the patch installed without problem. If all else fails, re-installing FS should guarantee the patch will install correctly.... Best regards, Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris, "Eventually I had to re-install FS. Then the patch installed without problem."Why? You don't need to re-install, only do that's like below, restore the original files below:BTW: Fs2004 test 9.0 vs 9.1 I have the similar gain like this test, many others users in the same situation. Do not forget the bridge was not available before 9.1 expect some fps limitation on fps decrease not related to others things.http://slacktide.org:88/~dan/FPS.html-Uninstall the patch-Delete the backup folder in fs2004 rootFrom the fs2004 Cd 1GAMEfs9.exedisplay.cfgdevices.cfgterrain.cfgCopy them to your fs2004 root; fs2004Restore the default fs2004 generic.bgl file: -1. Insert the


Kind Regards
Chris Willis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest _patrol_

Thanks Chris and Chris. I'll go with replacing the listed files and see what happens. I read about this before installing the patch but got lazy I guess. This time I'll do it right. Thanks again for your replies.David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Eric

Hello, I got better performance overall with the patch compare to fs9.0 with MANY test overall performance and autogen performance.. Can't beleave all these confusing post I read.BestEric

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...