Jump to content

CaptainFred

The Dungeon
  • Content Count

    13
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CaptainFred

  1. I used FSX with a i5 2500K 3.3Ghz and a GTX 550ti. Results were not perfect but highly acceptable with all cursors on the right. Just changed the graphic card to use correctly P3D 2.4.
  2. I use Prepar3D 2.4 and I confirm that AffinityMask is still working. http://www.prepar3d.com/forum-5/topic/performance-investigation-does-affinity-mask-matter/ 14 is the best value for quad core CPU and helps a lot those who have slutters. By default Prepar3D.exe uses all cores.
  3. I recently replaced my GTX 550ti by a GTX 780ti. Performances in P3D 2.4 are just more than twice without doing anything else. In FSX, no gain, the frame rate is exactly the same :mad:
  4. Hello all! I found a solution on Youtube. After loading the aircraft and the airport from witch you want to start (just after clicking OK), you just have to click on the square beside the cross on the upper right corner of the screen in order to get P3D windows in normak size while loading. After that, you will see the 737 PFD without any red bar and then you will be able to get the P3D window in full screen size. B)
  5. CaptainFred

    2D Panel

    I tried to do that, even by moving back the point of view in the PMDG 737. If I want to see the main screens and the runway, I cannot zoom more than 0.5 or 0.6. Also, I like to see the flaps position, the gear lights, the engines parameters. Not possible at once without a track ir.
  6. CaptainFred

    2D Panel

    3D panels are good while flying on cruise or non critical flight phases but require too zoom out for an overview of the runway on approach. We are left with a fine runway arriving at very high speed, which is totally unrealistic, especially by crosswinds. I stay on my preference for 2D panels and will not be customer of the PMDG T7.
  7. Bonjour tout le mondeEffectivement, ces nouvelles ne sont pas faites pour nous rassurer. Encore une politique de marketing risquée mais comme on dit: "tant qu'ils trouveront du monde pour acheter"...Cela dit avez-vous oublié l'époque de FS5.0 et FS5.1? C'était exactement pareil. Pour voler à San Francisco, Las Vegas, etc... avec de belles photos satellites bien pixelisées, il falait casquer. Mais un jour, un certain Manfred Moldenhauer s'est penché sur la question et nous a pondu un super compilateur de bgl nommé SCASM. D'autres outils tels que FED-OPE (dont je fus beta testeur) firent aussi leur apparition.Alors pourquoi des programmeurs chevronnés ne s'interesseraient-ils pas à Flight pour modéliser leur région? Si Microsoft ne veut pas lacher un SDK, il y aura toujours un moyen de décortiquer les codes et fabriquer nos propres outils de développement.En attendant, en ce qui me concerne, il va falloir que ce simu soit à la hauteur. Je ne suis même pas passé à FSX. Et même si la communauté des développeurs nous laisse de plus en plus tomber, je suis convaincu qu'FS9 a encore de beaux jours devant lui.
×
×
  • Create New...