Sign in to follow this  
whitav8

Proposal for two sticky threads

Recommended Posts

I would like to see two sticky topics/threads that only our grand moderators  would edit starting for P3Dv2.5

 

1. Potential Issues for LM - P3Dv2.5

     This would have a list of what appear to be issues ("bugs") that have already been discussed in regular threads by contributors to this forum and there is general agreement that this is something that needs to be fixed in a future rev or hotfix since it fails on everybody's installation. This would NOT include issues with third party addons and would NOT include requests for new features or complaints about the way something looks. An example for version 2.4 would be the "vertical cloud" issue

 

2.Performance Tips and Improvements for P3Dv2.5

    This would include a summary list and most likely a link to the discussion thread with the final answer/concept. Examples for this on the previous version (2.4) would be many of Rob Ainscough improvements to HDR, clouds, etc and pointers to CFG adjustments that work at least for a number of folks. Benchmarks for stated settings and scenarios on the moderators' PCs could be placed here as well for our reference.

 

  The motivation here is to reduce the need for exhaustive searching of all threads to stay current - many of the regular topic names don't indicate the real issue ("Performance is slow... - "I'm getting OOMs"). This might reduce the repeat questions for threads that have gotten old and less visible. The top one - LM issues - might help our wonderful developers quickly know what should be on their list. If LM has a comment, our moderator could place it in this sticky. Again, these threads would not include discussion from others but would simply be summary lists.

 

 

What do you all think?

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

We have set up this forum to do exactly what you are requesting.  We have a general forum for general issues.  We have a forum for Tips and Tricks (AKA performance tips), we have a forum for just issues relating to P3DV2.5 Default Scenery and Addons, and we have a forum for just issues relating to P3DV2.5 Default Aircraft and Addons. 

 

Rob does a great job in trying to keep everyone appraised of bug fixes, like the vertical cloud issue (which is no longer an issue) and usually pins a topic about it at the top of the General Forum.  Other issues and individual issues.  If you are going to tweak your P3D.cfg to death and raise all of your settings to the max and are seeing crashes, stuttering, the "blurries", shimmering, and other anomalies, then you need to fix your setup first.  IMHO, 68% of all of the issues and anomalies found in P3D/FSX/FSX-SE are created by by setups. The rest are caused by addons to P3DV2.5.  P3DV2.5 performs well out of the box, then one begins to tweak and install addons (some of which have not been found to be fully compatible with P3D and developers are working on new installers).  So the other 32% of the issues are the installation of addons.

 

When P3D was first released, our moderators started a compatibility topic showing exactly what addons were compatible with P3D and those that were not.  It became too much of a chore for the moderators to maintain the topic and the pin was removed.  Some people are really computer literate and can make any addon work in P3D but that may not be the case for those of us who lack certain computer skills.

 

If anyone is having issues with P3DV2.5, then they need to look at what they did recently that could have caused the issue.  I have seen just too many bad tweaks and high settings and see the individuals suddenly having problems.  What works well for me in MY computer system may not work well in YOUR computer system.  If I use the Affinity Mask tweak and say it equals 244, that's for my computer system.  Not your computer system.  Everyone needs to understand what tweaks do and do not do before they employ them.  There is no performance tweak that is the holy grail of performance tweaks for everyone.  If there was, you can rest assured Lockheed Martin techs would have put it in their program.

 

Our moderators are very busy people and I know Rob stays especially busy.  For instance, right now he's building a new computer system and doing some tests to see if the system enhances your experiences using P3DV2.5.  He does a lot of videos too to show us how well an addon performs in P3D.  The search engines are there for a purpose, to search for related issues you might be having.  I just did a Google search for "what are the improvements to HDR in P3DV2" and got tons of very recent hits from the whole flight simulation community plus in the forums at LockHeed.  You can do the Google search right here within AVSIM by using the search bar in the upper right corner of every forum. 

 

Personally I think Rob is doing an excellent job here keeping members informed of developments. I hope you do too.  It's not an easy job as Rob not only moderates this forum but every forum on AVSIM.  So, I'm against this idea as I need our moderators to be moderating in all of the forums and not just this forum.  I'm afraid you're going to have to continue to read the various topics and posts, post questions if you are having a problem (our members are very helpful), and use the search engines available.

 

Best regards,

Share this post


Link to post

Jim,

   I think you missed my concept - which is to have a summary list of possible LM issues and a summary list of tips and techniques - not a full blown, lots of discussion, super lengthy thread to wade through - and wonder just which reply was the one that solved the problem or at least addressed it best. I know you moderators are busy folks but I bet you come to a conclusion about each topic discussed. I think this would help everybody including LM. But if it is too much work, thanks anyway.

   I do think you moderators are doing a fantastic job! We couldn't have the success that I am seeing with 2.4 and 2.5 without these forums. I also encourage spending quite a bit of time WITHOUT any addons in order to make sure that the release, by itself, is performing well (everyone should have a scenario/flight benchmark that they use to test FPS and smoothness for each release) Then install addons, one at a time, and retest.

 

Best Wishes

Dave

Share this post


Link to post

Jim, an index of sorts to the most relevant info may indeed be very useful. Perhaps you might add dave as a moderator of that one single thread to keep it maintained for the rest of us? :P

Share this post


Link to post

Well, why don't you guys start the topics??  Maybe we'll pin it, maybe not.  Depends on its worthiness or value to the community.  Telling us moderators here at AVSIM on how to perform our job is always not a good idea. B)  I think that if there are any issues (and there are none right now that I'm aware of), then those topics will get a lot of publicity and normally get very large in the forums as members discuss the anomaly or the issue.

 

Best regards,

Share this post


Link to post

The chief problem I can foresee is one of 'control,' meaning restricting the ability to modify such an "Index" and associated "links" to the actual content to one designated person (or persons).

 

Every such attempt to date has ended by becoming an incomprehensible mess as everybody and their cat was able to add their two cents and more to the thread...

Share this post


Link to post

jim, bill, my suggestion was a jocular one for precisely those reasons... apols for my inadequate attempt at humour :) K

Share this post


Link to post

jim, bill, my suggestion was a jocular one for precisely those reasons... apols for my inadequate attempt at humour :) K

I thought it was funny, Kevin!

 

Vic

Share this post


Link to post

My guess is that such attempts will come full circle ... as has been speculated, such a thread would need to be control by one or two individuals - no more.  So that means folks would have to submit information to those individuals, who would then have to perform due diligence and try to confirm the information as accurate -- in some cases impossible to confirm (hardware/environment differences) so would be entered in "good faith" which then opens up another can of worms.

 

I do agree it would be nice to have such a system, but it would require a dedicated resources to manage that single point of entry and I'm still not sure "everyone" would read it or find it.  For example I keep my own P3D word document going ... but it also includes a lot of 3rd party specific information ... and my last check it's about 65 pages long (some of it not for public consumption).  I can't see anyone going thru 65 pages of material be it my document or one on AVSIM -- which means it needs a "search" function ... hence full circle.

 

As pointed out, P3D is ongoing development, much is the same, but some things change ... as they change so will the documentation.  I good example; I've asked for many of the HDR and other shader adjustments to be part of the P3D UI ... it's being evaluated by LM ... may happen, may not ... but if it does happen then chunks of my documentation would need to be updated/removed to reflect those changes.

 

And then there is the issue of filtering out information 3rd party don't want public.

 

And finally the issue of accuracy is important ... single source documents can also be the source of Urban legend ... one wrong set of information spreads like wild fire and problems are born.  Most of the information I provide is just giving folks options, I'm careful to NOT suggest "my way or the highway" ... simply try it and see if it works for one's needs.  Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't ... hence why I try to avoid those "golden rule" types of documents.

 

I understand the desire and I see the need for it, but I just don't know how it could be implemented (without spending a lot of time and money).  

 

I'll be perfectly honest, I spend most of my moderating time by providing information (to be consumed however the consumers wants to consume it or not) and less on ToS violations.  So far I don't think the AVSIM staff object to that ... but please do keep in mind I'm a software engineer and 2nd in command for a small software company so my time is 8-12 hours coding to help make money for my company that pays my real world bills.  Then I also have a life beyond flight simulation, so I try to contribute as much as I can even if not as well organized as I'd hope.

 

So in summary, I agree, but have no ideas on how to accomplish.

 

My 2 cents.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Share this post


Link to post

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