Is there a tutorial on FSREGEN?

[ShezA 176]

Bob, Jim,I think this is the critical point here, FSRegen created macros only call the library object and nothing else so they have no impact on fps AFAICS. I use it and it is way easier than direct GMAX.Try it...Shez

[arno 1]

Interesting, you are talking about macros with custom ramp textures that are giving problems. Most object design programs (just like GMax) don't create the right code for ground polygons (like ramp textures), they make code that is much to complex. So I can imagine that such code can give a performance hit. Although I think the difference you name is very big (compared to the default scenery scenery never gave such a drop while using a lot of macros).Arno

---

Member Netherlands 2000 Scenery Team[a href=http://home.wanadoo.nl/arno.gerretsen]http://home.wanadoo.nl/arno.gerretsen/banner.jpg[/a]

[arno 1]

Yep, I agree. The code that is in the macro (Area, RefPoint, etc) are also there when you produce the standalone BGL with GMax and that code is almost the same for both cases. So that can't make a performance hit.Arno

---

Member Netherlands 2000 Scenery Team[a href=http://home.wanadoo.nl/arno.gerretsen]http://home.wanadoo.nl/arno.gerretsen/banner.jpg[/a]

[Guest]

Yup please note the the above were not done with gmax of course but with Architect(we would not use gmax for the above) and while putting our models into a library will make many things easier I am not sure that it will solve the FPS problem with non gmax(non floating point) models(nor "ground type airport textures" such as add-on ramps as it's those that kill frame rates. I don't beleve that"ramp textures" being simple poly's use floats do they?. Again Arno,Bob and Shez for your constant help to everybody. Dan

[arno 1]

With the new commands you can also make macros with the floating point commands of course. But a lot of macros still use old code (sometimes even code that is origional for Fs5/98, but still works, but of course if not as efficient as can be for Fs2002).Arno

---

Member Netherlands 2000 Scenery Team[a href=http://home.wanadoo.nl/arno.gerretsen]http://home.wanadoo.nl/arno.gerretsen/banner.jpg[/a]

[ShezA 176]

That is interesting because I have just placed quite a few ground polys all over my DCA without any significant (0.5fps) hit on performance. These are FSDS1 simple planes with the appropriate z bias adjustment. I tried a similar technique with a simple GMAX plane and it flickered on the ground. When I made a very thin box (0.01) and placed it on the ground as a polygon the flicker disappeared but the edge of the box was showing even at the extremely small height parameter.RegardsShez

[rhumbaflappy 113]

Hi Jim.I e-mailed George about 6 weeks ago. He is fine, but his personal circumstances have prevented him from doing anything with FS2002... he doesn't even visit forums anymore ( told me to let him know when FS2004 comes out ). He is fine, healthwise.You could try to contact him, but just don't expect much, as his circumstances may not allow much.george@nhreas.comDick

[arno 1]

Both methods you mention are not really the solution.Both GMax and FSDS make an object with the PerspectiveCall, while you should use a LayerCall for placing ground polygons. With the polygon you can also give a layer number and that will stop the flickering. As I have said before :), the programs that make 3D objects never give the correct code for ground polygons.For a GMax object I have explained on my site how to make the changes to the ASM file. For the SCASM file it would required replacing the PerspectiveCall with a LayerCall (and you can also remove the ShadowCall as a ground polygon casts no shadow). I want to write a short how-to-do about this some day :).Arno

---

Member Netherlands 2000 Scenery Team[a href=http://home.wanadoo.nl/arno.gerretsen]http://home.wanadoo.nl/arno.gerretsen/banner.jpg[/a]