Nuno Pinto
Members
-
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Finally something to replace the "used-to-be-good" ATR.
-
Is it me or is the ATS not working properly? Right now, in cruise, it fails to maintain proper cruise speed, often "shaking" the throttles up and down, and frequently decelerating before reaching cruise speed, then hunting it down again. This is the best i can describe it. Very weird behaviour and happened on my 4 flights already, am i missing something here? Thanks
-
Used to. Now with the ridiculous prices, i gave up on upgrades (don't need them anyway) so i just threw away the boxes since i'm not going to sell anything soon.
-
It's a choice (again) but i see zero reasons to use more than 100-120 LOD. You just don't notice it unless you're pixel-peeping the horizon and i just don't do that. I'm far more concerned with the cockpit tasks and looking outside the window to the near terrain etc. Far away? Who cares. This alone removes a lot and i mean a LOT of work from the GPU, most of it useless. Also frees up a lot of memory. Spend some time comparing settings in ultra vs high and even medium and you'll come to the conclusion that most of that is just stuff you don't really need. There is zero difference between ultra and medium in building quality and tree quality and even quantity and 1fps here, 1fps there you'll end up gaining smoothness, less VRAM used for the exact same PERCEPTUAL sights. By all means, go 5090 if you "just don't care" but i doubt the better results come from brute force. Experience tells me otherwise.
-
Instead of using 4k, stay with 2560x1440 which is more than enough and get much much better performance. I have a 32" 2560x1440 monitor with 165Hz VRR and this thing is just sublime. I drive it with a €700 4070Ti SUPER (16GB) for over 130fps in the air and usually over 70 on the ground in complex airports with traffic from FSLTL. Of course i am using DLSS FG and TAA for the best results possible. It's all a matter of priorities: Use 4k, break the bank and buy an insane oven of a graphics card while using over 700w flying or go with 1440p, on a much cheaper graphics card while getting better results at the same time. Oh and see those 700w go under 500.
-
They moved it. It's now inside C:\Users\<USERNAME>\AppData\Local\Packages\Microsoft.Limitless_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalCache\<XBOX ACCOUNT USERNAME>\Content.xml What i really wanted to know is how to remove variants and default repaints from planes such as the ATR. I don't want the 42 and wanted to remove all default liveries so i can focus on the ones i like instead of having to go through lots of useless stuff.
-
-
Well, yes. I can't argue with that.
-
Why. We have no proper A330 / A330 NEO and already have a truly great A350 simulation. Oh well.
-
They "compressed" the javascript file (minified it) which is pretty normal when distributing these files, it's not "messed up". For a developer it's pretty obvious what happened, and yes you can just add the same function call as the previous version did, keeping in mind that a ; will separate instructions. Beware of the escape sequences (\) as this can REALLY mess up the parser that will read the code. Use a proper editor with javascript support to do this, not notepad word (God forbid!) or something similar. Notepad++ / Sublime Text are some fine examples that will deal with these files properly.
-
I find it more odd to be an MSFS-focused release when MSFS2024 is the current, supported sim. But hey, as long as it works i will surely like it. Now where's that 767? :P
-
When i saw the panel i was instantly transported into the insides of a DC-10. Nowadays it's all just "plastic" no matter how good the quality is. I wonder what's missing... Lighting? Proper photo textures? I wish we could see some cockpits like this one in MSFS.
-
It still needs a lot of QoL improvements. Pushback isn't fixed, there's no way to persist the "OFF" on that annoying auto-save feature, there's no auto step climb among many others (bad modeling and textures included). All the rest seems to work fine and i had a nice uneventful 13h30 flight yesterday. This is what it was built for (very long hauls) and it delivers there.
-
1080p benchmarks then people run their simulator at 4k and any difference simply goes away. A 7800x3D which is way more efficient than a 9800x3D will perform about 3-5% less. Why do they even run benchmarks at 1080p which most people don't even use? I know the idea is to remove any GPU limitations, but it's stupid nevertheless because it doesn'r reflect real use for most.
-
Are they really re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re selling the 737 or is this a free update for whoever got it previously?
