OK - sticking with the Italian flavour - how about FSX.V?

 

Rob - given the problems we had at my College in recruiting experienced Oracle devs - even admins, with an academic software background, I wouldn't be overly surprised if they (LM) were also having a hard time putting together a team of experienced and FSX-qualified shader devs. Converting means one has to understand the existing FSX DX9 version, and then answering a few questions like "why DX11?" "What do we want it to look like?" "Considering DX9 is light on the system, and knowing FSX user's perchant for running every addon under  the sun - all at the same time - isn't a move to DX11 going to require some really creative programming in order to accomplish the user expectations?". This would perhaps force a similar path to that of the now-defunct "Flight", which may be a lot easier route for producing a commercial P3D Training Aid.

Well, given that the Flight Sim franchise has been around for so long and it has come full circle I think the "new version" deserves to be called:

 

FSGeneration

Well, given that the Flight Sim franchise has been around for so long and it has come full circle I think the "new version" deserves to be called:

 

FSGeneration

leave the VC for a merketing career, looks like you could be good at it

When Is the dx10 fixer getting released ?, and where will I be able to download it from

L

I will be glad when Steve releases the fixer, then all this http://forum.avsim.net/topic/421238-to-dx10-or-not-to-dx10-thats-the-question/

nonsense might stop

I had to back out as I was out numbered, and have retreated here where it is safer.

The negativity amazes me, and they won't come to this forum to discuss it. I suppose they are out numbered. :lol:

I will be glad when Steve releases the fixer, then all this http://forum.avsim.net/topic/421238-to-dx10-or-not-to-dx10-thats-the-question/

nonsense might stop

I had to back out as I was out numbered, and have retreated here where it is safer.

The negativity amazes me, and they won't come to this forum to discuss it. I suppose they are out numbered. :lol:

I don't get why some folks (including developers) are so vocal in their opposition to DX10. Don't like DX10 or think the mode is inferior? Don't use it. No need to be insulting.

 

As far as the poster in that other thread, I found him to be insulting and over the top. On top of that, when you gave him a place to go and a person to speak with, more childish quips was all you got.

 

As small as the community is supposed to be, it seems some dont care if they contribute to the fracturing. Regardless I'm looking forward to the DX10 fixer. Others using DX9 can believe whatever they like, but I'm sure 10 is the way to go.

Hi Guys,

 

I have been lucky enough to get hold of a copy of Steve's masterpiece and let me tell you it's all I was hoping it would be and far more. I have been using DX10 for several months now, with the early patches it was a fantastic experience and also offered extra fps, however I still had a few problems with flashing airports etc. These all seemed to be fixed with this software and my whole FSX experience seems smoother ( I am currently en-route to Cologne from Washington, the sun has just started to rise and the views are breathtaking!) The other day whilst beta testing FS2Crew Airbus Button version I did six! yes six flights back to back without a single problem. So if if any one is worrying about trying this software, don't be!

Can I ask a simple question...in that with this script driven patch'er...is all we do, in after buying and downloading it...is to  run it, and then be able to use DX10 Preview Mode, just as error-free as we can expect in DX9?  This is what I am looking for...something that will simply cause a .cfg script change as/where needed, to allow DX10 Preview mode to render itself much as DX9 does. Is this what this product will do?  Download....run....and DX10----fly?  

*Pops head up briefly...*

 

Is it released yet?

 

No? Damn. I'll check in tomorrow!

 

*Pops head back down again...*

Pretty much a "yes" to that, Mitch, except that it's not a script-driven patcher - it consists of a couple of user executables - "DX10 Controller" and "DX10 Toolbox" as shown here (in it's unpacked state before running the installer, and along with some pages from the manual). It does have sufficient additional configurability, allowing you to fix things like missing textures, tag aircraft as "aircraft", convert 8-bit textures, etc, - problems which are not so usual, and are not fixable by the Controller itself. For the most part though - it's Plug and Play.  :wink:

How about DX10SSsssssss...That's amazing!

When Is the dx10 fixer getting released ?, and where will I be able to download it from

L

End of this week, I'm told, but I'm not at liberty to say from where you will download it....

It IS end of this week..... Well nearly.....

 

Steve, come on......

Pretty much a "yes" to that, Mitch, except that it's not a script-driven patcher - it consists of a couple of user executables - "DX10 Controller" and "DX10 Toolbox" as shown here (in it's unpacked state before running the installer, and along with some pages from the manual). It does have sufficient additional configurability, allowing you to fix things like missing textures, tag aircraft as "aircraft", convert 8-bit textures, etc, - problems which are not so usual, and are not fixable by the Controller itself. For the most part though - it's Plug and Play.  :wink:

Wow, Paul.....sound's great!  Sound's like something I'd like to investigate for sure...

 

Thanks for your response!

 

Mitch

isn't a move to DX11 going to require some really creative programming in order to accomplish the user expectations?

 

If they plan to include Tessellation feature supported in the DX11 (only) API then that will (even when accelerated by hardware) put a significant load on the GPU(s) but it is visually better looking.  P3D's move to DX11 will/must support multiple GPUs in order for it to have good levels of performance ... multi-GPU utilization is something that we don't have for DX9 or DX10 in FSX.  If P3D doesn't provide multiple GPU benefits ... and to be clear I mean more than "support", I mean actually utilize more than one GPU then it's going to be a difficult sell and definitely may not meet many expectations.

 

Not sure what PigsInSpace issue is with DX10?  Changing AA/AF settings doesn't impact VAS at all so not sure how he thinks that would be a cause for OOM in DX9?  I think it stems from PigsInSpace limited screen resolution which is only 1920 x 1200 (24"), hence his desire to go above 4XAA.  AA is a filter, a filter inherently reduces overall image quality ... the best image quality is when there is NO AA.  AA was introduced because of screen resolution limits and how graphics work in a PC ... remove the "jaggies" in pixel based systems -- which AA doesn't really do, it's just a blending process.  As screen resolutions (single monitor) continue to increase (and our dpi improves) beyond 2560 x 1600 where were now at 3840 x 2160 ($3000 now) and in two years it will become very affordable (<$1000).  The future in graphics is where we don't need to use AA any more.  The real solution to solving Jaggies in pixel based systems is to improve screen resolution and obtaining better DPI ... not AA.

 

And then a long list of people saying AA doesn't work in DX10, which is simply just wrong.  I don't know how many times I have to post a screen shot or video showing DX10 with 4XAA ... but some people will never believe, it doesn't matter what evidence is provided ... they suggest screenshot was modified or the video was modified, etc. etc. Whatever it takes to continue to justify DX9.

 

I think what disappoints me most is the continued lack of support from 3rd party developers over DX10 ... like it or not, DX10 came with FSX, it's real, it exists, 50% of the potential buying market use DX10 (probably more when Steve's work is released).  These should be enough reasons to properly support DX10 and some 3rd party developers do indeed test and make sure their products are DX10 compatible, some do not ... even those in the $90 price range

 

But hey, one 3rd party developer's failure is another 3rd party developer's opportunity ... can't wait for Steve's product even though my existing DX10 fixes are working very well with some of Paul's assistance.

 

Is DX10 perfect no, is DX9 perfect no, is FSX perfect no ... is DX10 going to improve, yes!

If they plan to include Tessellation feature supported in the DX11 (only) API then that will (even when accelerated by hardware) put a significant load on the GPU(s) but it is visually better looking.  P3D's move to DX11 will/must support multiple GPUs in order for it to have good levels of performance ... multi-GPU utilization is something that we don't have for DX9 or DX10 in FSX.  If P3D doesn't provide multiple GPU benefits ... and to be clear I mean more than "support", I mean actually utilize more than one GPU then it's going to be a difficult sell and definitely may not meet many expectations.

 

Not sure what PigsInSpace issue is with DX10?  Changing AA/AF settings doesn't impact VAS at all so not sure how he thinks that would be a cause for OOM in DX9?  I think it stems from PigsInSpace limited screen resolution which is only 1920 x 1200 (24"), hence his desire to go above 4XAA.  AA is a filter, a filter inherently reduce overall image quality ... the best image quality is when there is NO AA.  AA was introduced because of screen resolution limits and how graphics work in a PC ... remove the "jaggies" in pixel based systems -- which AA doesn't really do, it just a blending process.  As screen resolutions (single monitor) continue to increase (and our dpi improves) beyond 2560 x 1600 where were now at 3840 x 2160 ($3000 now) and in two years it will become very affordable (<$1000).  The future in graphics is where we don't need to use AA any more.  The real solution to solving Jaggies in pixel based systems is to improve screen resolution and obtaining better DPI ... not AA.

 

And then a long list of people saying AA doesn't work in DX10, which is simply just wrong.  I don't know how many times I have to post a screen shot or video showing DX10 with 4XAA ... but some people will never believe, it doesn't matter what evidence is provided ... they suggest screenshot was modified or the video was modified, etc. etc. Whatever it takes to continue to justify DX9.

 

I think what disappoints me most is the continued lack of support from 3rd party developers over DX10 ... like it or not, DX10 came with FSX, it's real, it exists, 50% of the potential buying market use DX10 (probably more when Steve's work is released).  These should be enough reasons to properly support DX10 and some 3rd party developers do indeed test and make sure their products are DX10 compatible, some do not ... even those in the $90 price range

 

But hey, one 3rd party developer's failure is another 3rd party developer's opportunity ... can't wait for Steve's product even though my existing DX10 fixes are working very well with some of Paul's assistance.

 

Is DX10 perfect no, is DX9 perfect no, is FSX perfect no ... is DX10 going to improve, yes!

+1