Hopefully someone will report back whats under the 10.30 hood this weekend.

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/437940-conference-and-x-plane-1030/?p=2952660

That's why I think there really should be an option for users to switch this off, even in 64 bit mode. I know that Ben wrote in his post that he does not want to add another option to the rendering settings, but this option could be very important. Not everybody will be able to buy new RAM or an entirely new computer when suddenly the update is official ... of course nobody is forced to update to 10.30, but as 10.30 is supposed to bring some other important updates, not just the view improvement, even people with less RAM will probably want to update.

And what did Ben answer to your question? :

 

we’ll have to see during beta.

 

This means: should it turn out, that this becomes a real problem in some situations, then Ben will reconsider his position on not wanting an extra "option". Thus I would say: lets wait and see ...

This will be very nice for flying the heavies in X Plane!  Now if we could just get some more quality third party US airports.

I really can't understand why a much simpler approach, like that of MSFS, Aerofly, or even Flight Gear, can't be followed in X-Plane...

 

On any of those sims I can have max visibility way above what x-plane allows presently, without any fps loss and a very acceptable rendering of the distant scenery, while I fear that increasing XP10 to a 4x3 tile area will probably affect fps :-/  Well....

 

Space Flight in FSX:

 

Well, I just ordered another 16Gb of Ram in preparation.

I really can't understand why a much simpler approach, like that of MSFS, Aerofly, or even Flight Gear, can't be followed in X-Plane...

Likely because you don't know the differences how the scenery system in X-Plane works ... Like everything, there is no "golden bullet" which makes everything perfect. It has its advantages and disadvantages ... the disadvantages are, that the scenery is quite "heavy" ... which limits your ability to load as much of it as you want. This comes from the fact, that almost all of it is pre-computed ... and almost none of it is computed/prepared on the fly in the sim (which can be an advantage too). The more you let the sim process the scenery (create the mesh etc.) the more dynamically you can create the world around you ... and the more you can make it in the distance less heavy. BUT at the cost, that your sim needs to do more of the scenery preparations at runtime ... where you either spend lots of time, or make the scenery simpler to spend less time ... there is no free lunch B) !

Do a search in this forum on : 10.3

 

interesting.

 

Bob

This is fantastic news... easily one of the best things that could have been packaged into 10.30.  Looking forward to the other stuff, but it is nice to see LR is listening to its customers. 

 

-Phil

"We have been working on clouds" Interesting !

 

I wonder what the "new features for VFR and IFR flight" are !?!

Ben said that the new DSF's will be loaded in the lowest possible resolution + with no autogen,so I in that case I don't think there will be a problem,nevertheless let's wait for the release and we will be smarter.

Ben said that the new DSF's will be loaded in the lowest possible resolution + with no autogen,so I in that case I don't think there will be a problem,nevertheless let's wait for the release and we will be smarter.

There is now "lowest possible resolution" in mesh DSFs ... There is just mesh ... without any information / knowledge about what would be "low res" and what not (that would add another, substantial overhead to DSFs). And from what I heard from Ben (personally), the code WILL load autogen (as creating code which would separate it out, and load it extra ... later ... would mean a lot of dev overhead and would maybe not worth the spent time) BUT of course autogen will (just like roads, forests etc.) will only be rendered when you are close enough to them (just like it is the case today).