FSDT WOW - Control Tower Fun

[pete_auau 1,158]

News Flash, i don`t use any FSDT products (face palm)

 

FSDT  is  not the only  addon that uses  the couatl

[RW1 615]

 

 

FSDT is not the only addon that uses the couatl

As i remarked previously i do not use FSDT neither FlightBeam or any other developers that use it! But good on them for the innovative concept.

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

 

 

As i remarked previously i do not use FSDT neither FlightBeam or any other developers that use it! But good on them for the innovative concept.

 

I haven't been a fan of couatl either.  When it goes south all of your couatl airports are hosed and it has, sometimes been a day or two to get it working again.  Ugh.  If they could make it easier to troubleshoot and more stable it would be better.  Let's face it, it's in a world where there are lots of add-ons and if something can make it unstable then it should be tightened up and/or made more transparent for help because something I never want to do is interact with a cranky developer about my sim.  But....I *am* happy that they're innovating and, while it's only a feature I *might* look at once, there are other possible things that could come out of it.  So I give them kudos for innovating.  Having said that, FSDT airports are expensive and have been lagging when it comes to surrounding areas.

[tttocs 301]

 

 

But, I'm not touching Couatl even with a 10 foot pole. Reading about so many complaints regarding Couatl made me think that way, sadly.

 

And yet...  Been flying with Couatl airports (FSDT and Flightbeam) for some years now and I've never had the least bit of trouble with it.  Many others are in the same boat - everything just works and there's no reason to post.  There's a reason that FSDT and Flightbeam airports are so highly anticipated - and Couatl is a big part of why they work so well with relatively minimal impact.  Every time I go into KDEN, for example, I shake my head at 1) how good it is, and 2) how little it impacts performance on my modest system.

 

Scott

[tf51d 284]

The AVATAR Tower Experience does use the AVATAR mode and is P3D only, as per the KMEM previews on the FSDT forums.

Then somebody should edit that video, because it only mentions Microsoft Flight Simulator.

[Seria17hri11er 15]

Very cool.  Thanks for posting.

[Ted Striker 338]

The immediate thought I had watching that video was of the first PC "game" I bought other than a flight simulator. It was Myst, a very interesting, fun, and challenging puzzle game. A very innovative software package in its time. I am now imaging DTG Aircraft Mechanic School in ten years in which you, as an Avatar, try to correctly overhaul an aircraft engine.

 

Rich, thanks for posting the information on the inner workings of the Couatl engine. I always wondered why FSDT needed to have that separate engine running and assumed it was for anti-piracy.  I did not know that it did all that. I put off buying any Couatl driven airports for a long time because of the problems I read about on these forums. When KDEN came out I couldn't resists anymore. I was so amazed by the graphics and minimal performance impact that I then purchased KLAX, KLAS, and KPHX. Not hard to guess what part of the USA I live in. I'm happy to report that I have had few issues with Couatl and the ones I have had were solved by installing an update.

 

Ted

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

Ted

 

Your welcome - I really didnt realize how much was going on in the background of Couatl - I felt FSDT was lagging behind but now there up there with the big boys imo - well done FSDT

[Guest]

It's not using P3D's AVATAR mode, the lead in to the video, says it's for FSX.

 

The AVATAR video has P3D menu system (Scaleform), other videos uses high level of Dynamic Reflections ... you can do "some" reflections in FSX, but NOT to the extent of dynamic ones P3D provides.  It would need to be much more than just "a scripting" engine to accomplish what was presented in those videos.  Although the Virtuali crew as talented, bringing DR and Scaleform menus to FSX would be impossible for them without access to the source code.

 

I'm guessing the FSX label was there so as to keep that audience interested even if some of the functionality may not be implemented in FSX.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[Gregg_Seipp 568]

 

 

And yet... Been flying with Couatl airports (FSDT and Flightbeam) for some years now and I've never had the least bit of trouble with it. Many others are in the same boat - everything just works and there's no reason to post. There's a reason that FSDT and Flightbeam airports are so highly anticipated - and Couatl is a big part of why they work so well with relatively minimal impact. Every time I go into KDEN, for example, I shake my head at 1) how good it is, and 2) how little it impacts performance on my modest system.

Scott

 

Yeah, I was that way until it happened to me a couple of times.  It was frustrating.  I think I ended up doing a rebuild after reading posts and terse exchanges over at fsdt last time.  I have reinstalled about half of the airports since moving to P3D 3.2.  I like the airports...flightbeam more...but I'm always a little nervous about them.

[TheFlightSimGuy 514]

I like the airports...flightbeam more...but I'm always a little nervous about them.

 

I feel exactly the same way. Also the short pauses when flying into one of these airports have always put me off a little. 

[tf51d 284]

 

 

I'm guessing the FSX label was there so as to keep that audience interested even if some of the functionality may not be implemented in FSX.



Cheers, Rob.

 

I can appreciate that, but there was no mention at all of P3D, unless you saw the FSDT forum post, one would think it was for FSX.

[Michael Moe 495]

Looks awesome. Nice to see progress and new great ideers.

 

FSDT airports is top notch

 

Michael Moe

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

I haven't been a fan of couatl either. When it goes south all of your couatl airports are hosed and it has, sometimes been a day or two to get it working again. Ugh. If they could make it easier to troubleshoot and more stable it would be better. Let's face it, it's in a world where there are lots of add-ons and if something can make it unstable then it should be tightened up and/or made more transparent for help because something I never want to do is interact with a cranky developer about my sim. But....I *am* happy that they're innovating and, while it's only a feature I *might* look at once, there are other possible things that could come out of it. So I give them kudos for innovating. Having said that, FSDT airports are expensive and have been lagging when it comes to surrounding areas.

Easy to see your frustrations but even with .bgl based airports there are bound to be problems as you can see from reading any developers forums. There are just so many possible configurations between operating systems, different virus scanners blocking things there not supposed to block, people with scenery layering issues, multiple AFCADS, etc., there's always a chance something could go wrong be it a Couatl driven airport or one that just uses .bgl files.

 

I've been fortunate that since 2008 using FSDT and FB airports when they came on the scene that I've had no issues ever with them. Truth be told, I've had more issues with Aerosofts and other developers .bgl based airports than I could count on one hand.

 

One thing about FSDT and Umberto, is that I've considered them one of the best at answering customer service issues quickly and effectively. Although Umberto may come across as terse, it's only because so many of the same questions have been asked over and over again without people simply searching the forums. That's why a lot of times he begins his reply with "this has been asked and answered many times" followed by a link to the solution. I'd probably get worn thin as well if people kept asking me the same question over and over without doing a quick search.

 

Having said that, I've seen some people be down right nasty to him and he always remains professional and composed and even offered those people a TeamViewer session to help them solve the problem. I know other developers who faced with those type of customers would either ban them or not continue to help them at all.

 

 

 

 

I can appreciate that, but there was no mention at all of P3D, unless you saw the FSDT forum post, one would think it was for FSX.

Tom, it says right at the begining of the video "Avatar Experience", only P3D has the avatar mode.

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

Easy to see your frustrations but even with .bgl based airports there are bound to be problems as you can see from reading any developers forums. There are just so many possible configurations between operating systems, different virus scanners blocking things there not supposed to block, people with scenery layering issues, multiple AFCADS, etc., there's always a chance something could go wrong be it a Couatl driven airport or one that just uses .bgl files.

 

1+