Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

N400QW

Why do certain addons work correctly with SP2 but not Acceleration?

Recommended Posts

Recently, people have noticed certain addons that work differently with SP2 than Acceleration. Specific ones that have bitten me and made me back out of Acceleration are below:Some Imaginesim scenery was unusable at night under acceleration. KCVG worked fine, but others had frames in the single digits (MYNN-3.8 fps and KCLT - 0.5 fps). I was in a discussion on the PMDG forum where another simmer did not have these problems, so I backed out of Acceleration and installed just SP1/SP2. Now my frames were in the 30s for all the airports. I did notice that the lights under Acceleration were big blobs, but looked normal in SP2.There has been much discussion on the LevelD forums about double spool-up to start the engines, and the FMC clearing when the engine starts. Guess what--this only happens with Accleration, but not SP2 again.I guess I'll just keep Acceleration off my box for now, but I will miss the additional content, but getting my other addons to work is much more important to me.Kylehttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/747400.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Well this is an old topic. Acceration is just SP2 with a few extra addons, if you could remove just the addons then youd would have FSX SP2, so its odd that you say something works in sp2 but not acceration as they are basically the same thing. As far as addons are concerned SP2 removed backward compatibilty with FS9 planes, they had to do it sooner or later or it would of stalled the development of the sim, but keeping compatibiltiy with old planes. Simply put, new planes must be compiled with the FSX tools or they may not work correctly. A lot of developers simply made old planes work in FSX and this caused issues with, textures and gauges, but most are now making fully FSX only planes which as far as im concered are way better then the FS9 ones. So there you go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've run into this as well. I wouldn't mind seeing a good answer to this. All I can do is guess.Acceleration does make some changes to scenery that SP2 doesn't, things like the carrier and new detailed areas. I also conjecture that it tidies up some of the autogen, maybe the way some of the audio files are handled. I don't really know, though.Companies like DBS who run into this problem are usually good about patching their product to help the situation.Jeff ShylukAssistant Managing EditorSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a big picture (stand back and look at things) perspective, understand developers are adding to the basic structure of the product.For a few versions of the sim that underlying structure was being enhanced gradually. Developers and customers got accustomed to expecting the process of producing 3rd party products would be predictable. This was the result of the underlying product structure, itself, remaining predictable.Many calls had been made for MS to radically change the fs underlying structure, and in FSX, those calls were answered. When such a dramatic change occurs, mistakes and rework is common. MS found their product insufficient on release and adjustments were required to the core functionality (twice) before relative stability was acheived.Its simple to understand that with fundamental changes ongoing in the core structure of the product, that developers could not organize smooth product introductions, and because impossible expectations were set in everyone's mind from the fs2002 to fs2004 transition for stability, that severe churning in the market for 3rd party developers was predictable.This is one reason why I choose to semi-retire from scenery design. I felt certain that delighting customers would be possible only when I understood where things would stabilize anew. One of the shifts that has occured with sp2 was a strong message that backward compatibility was ending. This is just one example of the "volitility" of the bedrock on which 3rd party products are based. My post is not to suggest any opinions about this process...I am not really qualified. I must believe that fsx needed the significant revolution in structure to further evolve, and I really like fsx sp2 much better than fs9 as a basic product. And it will probably become fun to design scenery for again, it just not fun for me to try to build on unstable ground.I offer kudos to those designers that continue to brave these waters, turbulant as they are. I am now a customer rather than a provider, and have a few of your products that do improve fsx.Cheers,Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are not airfields where I recognize we did work in Acceleration. With that said my guess is some content they depend on changed in Acceleration. In terms of aircraft, are these FSX-compatible aircraft made with FS9 or earlier tools? Or FSX-native aircraft made with a flavor of the FSX-SDK? The lighting issue makes me suspect "FSX-compatible" and not something done with the FSX SDK. And indeed there was a fair amount of sim behavior specific to Acceleration for aircraft and helos, and that could be what is causing the issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said Bob. Good to find something we agree on.Here's hoping you get back to development now that the volitility seems to have subsided a bit:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SP2 buggered up my FS2Crew tiller unit that I use in my 767 version. I'd be curious to know what specifically SP2 changed to affect my tiller unit in this way.Fortunately it's a very tiny issue as it's still easier to use the joystick than my tiller :-)Bryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>SP2 buggered up my FS2Crew tiller unit that I use in my 767>version. I'd be curious to know what specifically SP2 changed>to affect my tiller unit in this way.Bryan, was this done using the new FSX "nosewheel steering" key_events?C++ KEY_STEERING_INC -or- XML STEERING_INC C++ KEY_STEERING_DEC -or- XML STEERING_DECC++ KEY_STEERING_SET -or- XML STEERING_SETI'm curious, since I've not yet tried them myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Father Bill,Yes, new FSX C events and variables were used.My tiller worked great before Acceleration. After that, not so great... It now only turns from the center position to the left. No right turns.This was a tiller unit that I added to the FSX Level-D 767.-Bryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your note Ron...I suspect we'd have much to agree on and find mutual respect if we had the chance to truly know one another. Sometimes the internet isn't personal enough for that, and people's written word just rubs each other a bit.Best to you,Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>My tiller worked great before Acceleration. After that, not>so great... It now only turns from the center position to the>left. No right turns.Thanks for the confirmation. Maybe I'll cobble up a tiller myself and do so experiments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are welcome Bob. I too have suspected that is the case.The net is really not the greatest communication tool ever invented and it's pretty easy for typed words to cause misunderstandings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites