FSX SP1 vs SP2 objects....

[Gypsy Baron 10]

Those of you that may be using the Object Placement tool tocreate or enhance scenery for uploading should be aware thatbetween FSX-SP1 and Acceleration-SP2, several objects wereadded and if you use them in scenry they will not appear forFSX-SP1 users.I discovered this to my chagrin when looking into another issue and loaded my Tonopah Test Range, Tonopah and Nellisscenery uploads. None of the parked cars showed up in SP1. There is a whole listof objects beginning with the name "Veh_ParkingLot_...."that are available post SP1 but are not in SP1.Also, it seems that ACEs made some changes to the defaulthangars and bulidings at Nellis between SP1 and Acceleration SP2.I found that my added "fire house", placed in the correct location,is inside a large hangar in SP1 but is sitting in plain view inAcceleration-SP2. What a @&$%^% can of worms this turns out to be!!!Designer, beware... Paul

[quantumleap 1]

The difference is between FSX-SP1-SP2 and Acceleration content i.e. most of the changes in objects and scenery come from the added content just for Acceleration and differences would not be seen by users who just went FSX-SP1-SP2.So yes, it does mean that scenery developers have to be aware that they potentially need to develop for users who have Acceleration installed differently for those with FSX-SP1-SP2. This is especially true in the places where new content was added or modified for Acceleration and its missions e.g. around Edwards AFB, Reno, Cape Canaveral, Berlin, Longleat, Istanbul, etc..Another thing you need to be aware of is that in some cases, there are changes in the GUIDs for objects representing the same physical structure between the Acceleration version and the FSX-SP1-SP2 version (for example launchpads 39A and 39B at Kennedy Space Center). This means that you cannot generate just one scenery placement BGL file to work on both. You would need to create different ones for these objects between them. The ACES people I talked to agreed that this was effectively an issue which was 'not optimum'.You will also find that in some cases for Acceleration content, some of the models/textures for an object which kept the same GUID across both FSX-SP1-SP2 and Acceleration have been reworked in some way including changes to for example size (scale). This means again if they fixed up an object for use in Acceleration, it could have a different size and shape (and position) which again means you need to handle it differently between versions.Jeff

[Gypsy Baron 10]

Thanks for that feedback, Jeff. "The ACES people I talked to agreed that this was effectively an issue which was 'not optimum'.".... that statement makes me both laugh andshudder at the same time! It seems to me, at least in areas that I have delved below the surface a bit, the "not optimum" approach seems tobe pervasive in FSX. Paul

[scott967 62]

ISTM that if MS are going to provide scenery content as part of an addon such as acceleration, they should use SDK methods and not muck with default files.scott s..

[quantumleap 1]

To clear up the comment which has been misinterpreted - "not optimum" meant it was a simple bug they missed. Nothing for anyone to shudder over - so keep smiling :-)As for the comment regarding "they should use SDK methods". From all I have seen related to the scenery elements provided in Acceleration, absolutely everything is possible to be done via the supported and documented SDK techniques.Jeff