Sign in to follow this  
Macflyer

FU2 so awesome

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Well, I'd at least BUY FU3 while you can.. available now but not in the future :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right... I put it on my to-do list :-)Does the "Sold out" FU3 read the original release of FU2?I forgot how great the rain looks in FU2.... esp. on the windshield :-) (hello Austin Meyer, do you think you could do it more like FU in future x-plane version?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too love FU 2, and had no problems setting it up, despite being told that it was incompatible with Windows XP.It is a simple matter to load the scenery onto FU 3.The raindrop effects are indeed awesome, but I am disappointed in the 'cotton wool' type cloud formations [ I believe cumulo- nimbus is the correct term !]They appear as pieces of a jigsaw slotted together at right angles [?]Perhaps it's time to invest in a new graphics card , as I a make do with an Intel 82810 E - pretty much obsolete so I've been told.Tip to other FU2 users - set propellor to 'automatic' in settings otherwise the P 51 becomes a devil to fly.Regards to all:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It never fails. I've just started FS X and I STILL miss FU3. It may be pretty but the price you pay for the system upgrade doesn't make it worth it. Plus they don't upgrade the things that are REALLY missing. It's funny how I scratched my head when, in FU 3 I was flying the arrow thru the clouds and all the sudden the plane started stalling for no reason. then I realized ICING!!!! something that FS STILL doesn't model. Somehow the guys at Looking Glass were able to make a sim that was challenging and educational but at the same time so much fun to fly. I would love to see if those guys could make an Open Source version of FU or better yet, see the talent in the flight sim community come together to make something like it that we developed and supported ourselves. Honestly, we all love this hobby and that devotion shouldn't be wasted on a product that consistently fails to meet expectations. There are old pilots and bold pilots and never old, bold pilots? :)mb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The clouds are the problem, and no-one has been able to fix this yet. But given the awesome talents here, its a matter of time. Just as soon as Bruce and Jon fix up the night lighting - they've redone planes, palettes, packages, - clouds will be a breeze.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Folks :-waveYes, whilst on the farm over xmas I took heaps of photos and have looked that the resfiles as well.Only problem, the models I see in FU3 are NOT the binfiles visible in the resfile :-( I tried changing cloud binfiles and, after trying 50+ types of weather, have not seen one :-( Basically, I replaced every cloud model with a large (1km x 1km), dark grey cube and haven't seen ANY cubes in the sky! This was after replacing just the bitmaps with random ones but I never saw any difference there either.I can see what appears to be cloud models in the resfile, but Resviewer doesn't decode them as binfiles and I have no idea how to it myself. I assume that these are left over from FU2?Any help would be appreciated :-waveRegards,Jon Point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may seem that Looking Glass had several cloud models in mind but failed to implement them. Is there a way to pinpoint which model has been implemented? If so, it might be possible to import one of the currently unused models to replace the one we see in the sim. That is, if you think that the ones you can't decode are the models being used, how about replacing these with the more elaborate models that aren't implemented?Hans Petter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon, have you tried switching these two options in "flt3.cfg":opt_enhanced_cumulus 1 (replace the '1' by '0')UsePuffCloudModels (disable by putting a ';' at the front).I think the FU2 behaviour was to use 3D plane models, and they were trying to make volumetric (puff model) clouds, so to use the res pictures, you would need to go back to the old FU2 planar models.And I'm probably totally wrong. Robret.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm virtually certain that Looking Glass intended to use lots of different cloud models in FU3, but they never got the chance. You can see some of these in the screenshots that are displayed during the installation process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I don't think so. As I said, I think it was the other way round - they had these high texture models using simple models (a flat base and the two crossed polygons, a bit like making trees). Then for FU3 they developed their puffcloud models, which were modelled better but had low quality textures: here's ome shots with the puffcloud models turned off:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/165584.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/165585.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/165586.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/165587.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/165588.jpgSo many of the flags in the flt3.cfg file seem to be to do with the old models (as shown in these screenshots), others are to do with the new "volumetric" models, and the two are mixed together - at least I can't tell which are which.So we can only improve the cloud textures by using the old models! I don't think they look so good - you need to take screen shots at the right moment to create a reasonable effect (which is what LGS did in their "loading screens"), but flying through them is ridiculous. But then again, even these simple models are way ahead of what FS had at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, assuming that we can use much larger binfiles, it should be OK. I'll get back onto this when I've turned some more lights off and flattened some more areas. Basically, I'm going back over the areas I've already flattened, removing lights and stupidly-placed LGS models (why do they put trees in the middle of roads?).I just hope that a few thousand polygons floating around the skies won't hurt framerates too much :-roll:-waveRegards,Jon Point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this