Orbx FTX Global Not DX10 compatible

[Mork 34]

 

I have no knowledge of any price OR release date at this point, OB, but I am aware

 

so.... we look forward to next week...  :wink: 

 

Hi Paul, when Steve says 'harder', does he mean harder as in more work but doable, or harder as in: I might not be able to crack this thing?

 

Now i'm using UTX lighting which is ok, but the OrbX lighting seems a lot nicer.

[Guest]

 

 

Then add to that most FSX users don't use the DX10 preview mode.

 

According to Tom's pole, it's about 50/50 right now (DX9 vs. DX10) ... if a 3rd party dev wants to sell "more" product, it's in their best interest to make sure it's DX10 compatible.

[Paul J 349]

Well, it can be anything, Mark.... I don't converse with Steve by 'phone, and I'm not a C++ or an HLSL programmer, but I expect more research, more testing, more re-writing, even more research - as you suggested - more work, but doable.

 

Almost anything can be fixed, or "got around" - it's just time and testing, then changing the manual. Even keeping the DX10 How-To doc requires much of this, too.

[Guest]

I don't have FTXG, but I am curious, are the problematic texture files .DDS format or BMP (or if in a .CAB)? If someone wants to send me one known problem sample I'll take a look at it.

 

EDIT: Assuming of course this is a texture problem.

[Mork 34]

Well, it can be anything, Mark.... I don't converse with Steve by 'phone, and I'm not a C++ or an HLSL programmer, but I expect more research, more testing, more re-writing, even more research - as you suggested - more work, but doable.

 

Almost anything can be fixed, or "got around" - it's just time and testing, then changing the manual. Even keeping the DX10 How-To doc requires much of this, too.

 

 

Ok, thanks

You are the most reliable source I know for these things, so your 'feelings' and expectations give me at least some insight on about if it can be solved. And I'm just really hopeful of Steve's work, so that's why I asked.

 

I did some more flying in FTX Global by the way, and too bad for you, I can't say it is disappointing and that you shouldn't buy it LOL. Because it just looks really nice in combination with landclass and UTX, so I actually would recommend you to get it.

Of course, if you only fly certain regions you already have nice scenery for, it would be silly to buy it. But I don't regret buying it for a second to be honest, it is really that nice.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

According to Tom's poll, it's about 50/50 right now (DX9 vs. DX10) ... if a 3rd party dev wants to sell "more" product, it's in their best interest to make sure it's DX10 compatible.

The best thing about AVSIM is that given the diversity of hardware and software, many people are advocates for improving the flight simming experience. If you read through the comments in the DX10 poll thread, you will realize that that type of poll is going to attract DX10 "advocates". The results would be similar if you asked whether people tweaked their cfg file or overclocked their CPU. These advocates are people that want to improve the behavior of FSX and are willing to put up with the associated drawbacks. If you don't think that their are drawbacks, just take a look at the DX10 subforum here . Honestly, the advantages to DX10 to me have been minimal and the drawback is a loss in frame rate. But then again, FSX is my third most-used sim, behind P3d and XP10. If VRS TacPack ever comes out with versions for either of those sims, I would probably never use FSX ever again, because that's all I use FSX for these days. VRS Tacpack is not DX10 compatible.

[Guest]

If you read through the comments in the DX10 poll thread, you will realize that that type of poll is going to attract DX10 "advocates".

 

I did read that thread and participated in it.  I disagree 100%, that thread has no more or less "attraction" to DX10 advocates than it does DX9 advocates... where is the proof to suggest otherwise?  By your own logic you can could say it'll attract more DX9 advocates.  Either assumption is not verifiable - it's just a simple poll.  Your statements would seem to indicate you have a BIAS towards DX9 "VRS Tacpack is not DX10 compatible." and "Honestly, the advantages to DX10 to me have been minimal and the drawback is a loss in frame rate."

 

Without knowing what hardware you are currently using and your FSX.CFG, I can't really comment of why you found lower frame rates in DX10 mode.

 

What I do see is a strong resistance to DX10 and I'm not really sure why?  I suspect resistance has to do with the emotional condition to "side" with something be it a 3rd party developer that doesn't support DX10 or something else (an existing big investment in DX9 add-ons)?  Or it could be that many just don't want to buy new hardware so stay with DX9.  To each his/her own, but regardless it's still 50/50 and would appear more and more users moving to DX10 especially after Steve release his user interface friendly installer package.  But either way, the data is there and supporting DX10 will be a positive move ... and dare I suggest moving in a direction that P3D is with V2.0 and DX11 because DX10/DX11 share much of the same accelerated features so those looking towards P3D and V2.0 will be in a better position IF they have their products working with DX10 in FSX. 

 

For sure one will need Steve's and other's DX10 fixes -- but FSX itself (regardless of DX9 or DX10) has many many drawbacks -- it's a on going battle to deal with and adjust FSX issues regardless of DX9 or DX10.  If you have good hardware (CPU, motherboard, GPU), then DX10 and Steve's fixes will help with OOM and improve performance (don't expect miracles).

 

Rob

[Guest]

I fail to understand why anyone should have a resistance to DX10... or DX9. You simply use what works best for you! Right now DX9 works better for me than DX10 (although it's always a compromise and a matter of preference) so I use DX9. If tomorrow something makes DX10 work better on my PC, I will use DX10. This has nothing at all to do with resistance towards a certain 'side' (I don't even think there are any sides) and I can't imagine people being a '######' of DX9 or DX10 for whatever reason.

 

It may sometimes SEEM that someone is a '######' of either DX9 or DX10 but those people are simply very happy with what DX9 or DX10 does for them and they can't imagine someone else might see other results and so they keep on saying 'DX10 is better' or 'DX9 is better' but both proclamations are subjective. I would think everyone knows it's all very system dependant.

[Q_flyer 766]

I fail to understand why anyone should have a resistance to DX10... or DX9.

 

+1

 

Exactly!

 

But some people fear those who don't see or do things, the same way that they do.

 

They want their choices to be reinforced by other people making the same choices.

 

... and when people make different choices, they feel insecure about their own.

[highways1 5]

It may still be a little while longer but problem solved.

 

Post 129: http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/62085-dx10-and-ftx-global-fix-being-worked-on/page-7#entry570658

[ricka47 614]

It may still be a little while longer but problem solved.

 

Post 129: http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/62085-dx10-and-ftx-global-fix-being-worked-on/page-7#entry570658

Great news!

[Mork 34]

:p0504: !!!

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

Without knowing what hardware you are currently using and your FSX.CFG, I can't really comment of why you found lower frame rates in DX10 mode.

 

My hardware is available by clicking on the MyPC link in any post that I've made. I should add here that I used to tinker with FSX and I had been playing around with DX10 ever since the Preview Mode checkbox could be clicked. I have followed the AVSim DX10 guide and kept updating the shaders fixes as they have been made available. Unfortunately, for me there are too many drawbacks (as there are also with tweaking the fsx.cfg file and OCing), so I finally made my FSX configuration pretty much "white bread". This decision occurred even before I installed TacPack, which of course as you know, is a fairly new addon for FSX.

 

In any case, this thread is about DX10 and FTX-G, so I don't want to get it any more off track than it is. FTX-G looks great in DX9 and I'm sure that it looks great in DX10.

[SierraHotel 987]

As Jeroen said, I will be purchasing Steve's DX10_Suite addon anyway, for two reasons;  everything that he's done so far for DX10, and also because the DX10_Suite will offer tons more than just this fix. :smile:

+1 I would also wager that the most vociferous against DX10 are those not particularly tech savvy, and would rather leave well enough alone.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

One of the few things these days that NickN and John V seem to agree on:

 

http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/9946-the-super-duper-ultimate-tweak-get-the-best-smoothness-and-performance-in-fsx/

 

This is from 2009, but it is a sticky from the ORBX public forums.