Default Learjet in FS9

[Guest]

I have been blinded, and may never see again...I checked out the super-dooper "new" Lear 45 at night in the VC... Bleech!What's with MS and that nasty pink!After all the breakthroughs in VC cockpit lighting, I'm astonished that MS is so far behind the curve... :(BillAVSIM OmbudsmanFounder and Director,Creative Recycling of Aircraft Partshttp://catholic-hymns.com/frbill/FS2002/images/fartslogo.jpg

[Guest]

I hear you Bill... It's the little things like that and some other issues with scenery that I have noticed popping up in the General Forum which just seem to let the new simulator down a little bit. Overall though, very impressed.[strong]Adam Nardone[/strong] Web & Graphic Design www.ion-media.net [/p]

[Guest]

>I hear you Bill... It's the little things like that and some>other issues with scenery that I have noticed popping up in>the General Forum which just seem to let the new simulator>down a little bit. Overall though, very impressed.Well, at least they didn't "break" the VC lighting! That's a definite plus!!! :)It's obvious though that their "designers" are still several years behind the curve in a/c & panel/gauge design... :) They should have read the tutorials posted on the web, including mine on VC cockpit lighting! :)BillAVSIM OmbudsmanFounder and Director,Creative Recycling of Aircraft Partshttp://catholic-hymns.com/frbill/FS2002/images/fartslogo.jpg

[Shaka 2]

>It's obvious though that their "designers" are still several>years behind the curve in a/c & panel/gauge design... :) They>should have read the tutorials posted on the web, including>mine on VC cockpit lighting! :)Sometimes I think about Microsoft and why they make FS. Of course, they bought it years ago from Bruce Artwick (I think), but for a long time it was the only game they really made. Now if you think about a large company like Microsoft, which was raking in cash for all those years selling operating systems, C++ compilers and MS Office, you have to think about just how cost-effective this division was in the grand scheme of things. I'm sure they never lost money on it, but I'm sure that it didn't make nearly as much money for them as their other products. Because of this, they can't have nearly as many programmers/engineers/artists/whatever working on FS as they do on other (more profitable) software.So, given that FS2XXX is a complicated program, and given that they maybe don't have the resources that other divisions have, I'm thinking that they have to cut corners occaisionally. Your VC lighting tutorial is a good example. Maybe they just don't have time because they are working on some other feature that is deemed to be more important? Maybe they worked it to a point where they decided it was "good enough"? Maybe they use "floaters" from other departments to temporarily work on things, and then go to work on some other project, so that they never really get immersed in FS? Expert users like the ones that lurk in this forum are the most likely people to notice these details. Maybe your average user never really thinks about pink VC lighting, and therefore MS doesn't worry about it too much?Remember when FS2002 came out, and how long we had to wait for the SDK's? Maybe this was more of an issue on the scenery side, but basically we were left to work things out on our own. Thanks to people like Lee Swordy, we made our own tools that were better than the ones that MS eventually provided for us. Also, it seemed that MS would only release the SDK after we had figured things out on our own. Since MS already had the tools, and they knew how to build scenery, would it really have been so much trouble for someone to write the SDK? Again, I think that it probably came down to priorities. Maybe the guy who eventually wrote a SDK had some other priority?Anyway, that's just me thinking about Microsoft. I guess it's not a perfect world, but I am happy for the FS that I have. :)- Martin

[Guest]

Although I've only tried this in the Mooney with success, I think it should work in the 45 as well... Provided I understand you correctly that is :)The pink glow of 2D backlighted instruments is the "default" and can be changed with the usual Night Color=xxxxxx in panel.cfg.If Microsoft releases a patch for this version, they should _really_ consider adding support for bright and luminous tags for virtual cockpit. Currently vc is not very usable at night IMHO. Also, they should fix the G:Var's getting out of sync when the same instrument is used on different panels or panel and vc (i.e. the adjustable bars on some attitude indicators).Oh, and future SDK's should provide information on how to make cue-lists work for new/modified sound-files.

[Guest panzerschiffe]

MS provided the capability for such things as backlighted gauges and all this other stuff, but they're not too concerned about making eye popping planes. They already know third party developers will take all the potential and create great airplanes. Especially now in the days of 40USD payware aircraft, what MS provided is an entire simulation with aircraft to satisfy the casual simmer for around 55USD MSRP. Pretty good deal.