Jump to content

NikkiA

Members
  • Content Count

    299
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

About NikkiA

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday August 1

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    IVAO
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes
  1. People assumed that Auran would cave when they did the same with Trainz assets, 'just fix up the [what are now] errors, and it'll all be golden', it was ~3 years of long pain while they refused to back down on the strictness of the new parsing, and they still refused in the end, they just conceded defeat by allowing the community to modify content that had been written by others on the download station. LM doesn't have the benefit of a partial copyright transfer as with the trainz download station, and thus if LM digs its heels in, all we can hope for is that others come along and replace the aircraft that have been rendered 'obsolete' by the new XML parser. I hope that you're right, that LM realise they can't dig their heels on this, but if not, it's going to be painful, and it may even be enough to kill P3D as the 'progress from FSX' path.
  2. After being frustrated with 2.1 I was suprised when I went back to FSX and noticed that the autogen'ed trees stretched out far further than I remembered, the only thing I can think of is that with 2.0 I'd set my slider to 'dense' and between having to dial that back to 'normal' and the change to the autogen radius in 2.1 that it's brought it back so far that FSX looks like 'forever away' in comparison. Of course the real problem with FSX's autogen has always been the buildings, time will tell if I can get used to a reduced radius of that again.
  3. He also ignores that some of us are able to get OOMs with default aircraft and default scenery, and just puts us down as liars or delusional.
  4. I suspect it's a memory leak when some 'exceptional event' is occurring, maybe it allocates vertex buffers for trees based on the size of VRAM, and if it generates too many trees for the buffer size it might lose track of trees, which then become 'lost memory'. NOTE: This is not a hypothesis of what is happening, just an example of how such a situation COULD happen. Who knows? There's too many factors between any two - even identical - machines to be able to say 'it works for me' and therefore dismiss other people's reports. Yes, brian is lucky, it doesn't affect him, truth be told, it doesn't affect me if I'm willing to live with a 3nm or so circle of tree coverage (which I am, till LM fix it, but I do want them to fix it, and soon)
  5. Jim, this is the thing tho, I was one of the first to report the runaway VAS problem, but I only have the problem with the setting at Dense or above, once I turned it down to 'Normal' I don't have a problem with it running away. It's still using a LOT of VAS, but that's OK. The downside of course is that the tree circle for 'Normal' is pretty small, and ruins immersion. At the time I reported it, I also noted the weirdness that 'Normal' uses more VAS than 'Dense' at the start of the flight, but Normal only climbs as you enter and exit areas, whereas 'Dense' would runaway rapidly to OOM. It's all a very strange do, and there's simply too many factors to say 'It works for me, therefore it's not LM's fault!', or to blame it solely on 3rd party planes, like many have.
  6. My test area for this is actually Borneo (WALR and fly west), it's pretty much nothing but trees once you get inland. e: WALB starts you a little deeper into the rainforest, but I haven't tried that airstrip in FSX/P3d, and a lot of these are disused/30° slope/tree infested, so YMMV. e2: WALB isn't in P3D, try Bario at WBGZ, that's nice and deep in the rainforest too.
  7. It's been a year since 'v2 is nearly ready', so I think it's fair to say that it's either not being worked on, or it takes a very very far back seat to whatever is going on in their life/lives. Either way, if it does ever materialise, is support going to be there? I've almost given up on ezca so many times in the last year due to how buggy it is, particularly the sensitivity of their copy protection and its propensity for crashing (itself, and more often than not, fsx as well) if it detects a whiff of a debugger anywhere near the system. It's a shame there isn't a viable alternative (opus's cameras felt far too clunky when I tried it), so I'll probably end up upgrading to 2.0 if it ever does appear.
  8. The biggest problem I had with VAs is that my simming is somewhat intermittent at times, and it's too easy to go the 2-4 weeks that many VAs require a PIREP filed in. As such, I ended up having my pilot locked in both VAs I joined. These days I sim much more frequently, but stick to fscaptain where I'm not constrained to specific routes/airframes, and no-one complains if I don't want to fly to a specific airport this week.
×
×
  • Create New...