No wall on B777

[sac601 0]

Oh thanks. I do not have Ezdok.

 

Al

[sac601 0]

olli4740 should I reload over everything again in this order?

 

Al

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

Hmmm ...

 

Does the issue last for more than, say, half a minute? The exterior view is NEVER correct, not even after waiting for the textures to be fully loaded and processed?

[sac601 0]

Right never corrected even after 10 minutes.Al

Even before loading the plane just choosing it and the picture appeared the same.

 

Al

[Stephen Murphy 0]

i had that same problem with no walls on the T7 i re installed the Acceleration and the walls now show 

[AzN1337c0d3r 3]

I think you mean; and some are having the exact same problems...

 

I'm sure most T7/NGX users are flying high without problems.

 

I also think its funny how people overly try to use dumb pictures like you did.  A few users have a problem and you want to call it a triple facepalm fail.  Meanwhile 1000's of hours have been flown by 1000's of users (almost 250 here on 777 myself) without a problems.  Yeah so, sounds more like a local problem or real triple facepalm fail on your part or setup.  

 

An example of a triple facepalm fail would be GTA 5 online, they pulled in 1 billion+ dollars, yet on the day of online release (Oct 1st) can't get 99% of users online for over 24 hours.   

 

That's not a triple facepalm. I'd like to see you design a system that can handle that many users on release day.

[VLJ510 16]

That's not a triple facepalm. I'd like to see you design a system that can handle that many users on release day.

 

You wanna know the difference between them and I?  I never said I could and therefore people never would expect it from me, nor have a taken any money to do so.  So the difference is went you say you can do something and fail at it (and dose so badly) people have a right to say you failed.  Also when even them themselves admit they dropped the ball.  Let also remind you most games the online works from day one with only slight adjustments needed.  Not huge down-times.  Its worth saying also they got over two weeks to see how many copies sold and adjust the network needs to meet the known likely demand from sales numbers, this is why I said it was a fail really.  Most games have only estimates of coming sales and get online infrastructure needs pretty much right.

 

I work as a networking administration and security consultant.  I'd like to work on a project like this, because I'd tell them with their budgets and known information we can get this done right the first time every time.  My skill set is not really designing or even working on a network anymore (but can and do do it).  More-so to meet, talk, look and find a solution then communicate that downstream to techs.  But I can tell you some of my past employers that networks have demand and likely security concerns over huge networks and never fail to work like Lockheed Martin, Philip Morris, and the Fifth Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, VA.  I always ended my contracts on high remarks.  Why? Because I never said I was going to do something for these companies and organizations and not do it even when given less known variables.

[AzN1337c0d3r 3]

You wanna know the difference between them and I?  I never said I could and therefore people never would expect it from me, nor have a taken any money to do so.  So the difference is went you say you can do something and fail at it (and dose so badly) people have a right to say you failed.  Also when even them themselves admit they dropped the ball.  Let also remind you most games the online works from day one with only slight adjustments needed.  Not huge down-times.  Its worth saying also they got over two weeks to see how many copies sold and adjust the network needs to meet the known likely demand from sales numbers, this is why I said it was a fail really.  Most games have only estimates of coming sales and get online infrastructure needs pretty much right.

 

I work as a networking administration and security consultant.  I'd like to work on a project like this, because I'd tell them with their budgets and known information we can get this done right the first time every time.  My skill set is not really designing or even working on a network anymore (but can and do do it).  More-so to meet, talk, look and find a solution then communicate that downstream to techs.  But I can tell you some of my past employers that networks have demand and likely security concerns over huge networks and never fail to work like Lockheed Martin, Philip Morris, and the Fifth Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, VA.  I always ended my contracts on high remarks.  Why? Because I never said I was going to do something for these companies and organizations and not do it even when given less known variables.

Lockheed Martin, Philip Morris, and Fifth Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond VA have vastly different budgets and peak network load requirements than a company like Rockstar or EA or Blizzard.

 

Look at WoW: MoP, Simcity Online, or Final Fantasy XIV for recent examples. These games are all done by major publishers that have established credentials and are all hugely popular games. For the first 12-24 hours, all of these games were unplayable. The fact of the matter is that rational companies won't drop 100 million dollars on servers to handle release date traffic and then only utilize 1% of that power a week later.

 

[Spook 96]

The 777 has lower texture usage than the NGX does. The external textures are only around 100MB total. 26MB in the texture.common200LR folder and around 60-80 or so per livery. 100MB is nothing for today's video cards that have 2+ GB of RAM on them. Stop jumping to conclusions - there's probably something else going on with your system.

 

I'm going to guess you have an AMD/ATI video card right? They seem to be far more susceptible to these problems than Nvidia cards and we don't recommend them and haven't for many years.

 

Thanks for the reply Ryan.

 

The piont i was making is that if the texture resolution was not so high (4096) we wouldnt see these problems.For example, 1024 textures load instantly...thts all the proof you need, and unless we're counting rivets zoomed right in, 1024 textures look....the same, with a much, much smaller footprint.With 4096, half get loaded then memory runs out = skelly plane.

 

The above is based on my own findings - flew a 4 hour flight with normal textures..pull into gate, go to outside view to see aes at work and half the plane refuses to load - cockpit sections, tail sections missing.Once this happens it will stay like it for the rest of the session.

 

Doing the exact same thing with 1024 textures and there is no sign of the same. Nothing. Press F11 and bang, its there instantly. So without being rude, is it not glaringly obviose what the problem is?

 

My sytem is stable  and more than capable, running a Nvidea G-Card.

[Spook 96]

oh well....

 

Ive put my case forward