Honnli

Just a video of my recent landing at Sydney Kingsford Smith International Airport in a Boeing 767-300. P.S. Wow, it's been a while since I last came on here...

Ben, if you're still having problems with the Seattle CBD not showing any autogen, I think I know what's causing that. Your plane is probably too far from the CBD. I think there is a limit to how far from your plane the objects are displayed. This is not the world detail setting in the rendering menu. That specifies how far from the camera objects are displayed. Rather, it might be the visibility setting in the weather menu which determines the distance from your plane at which objects are displayed, I'm not sure. Last night I was looking around Melbourne in XP10 with the free cam while my plane was parked on the runway at Melbourne International Airport, and I had exactly the same problem that you were having. The Melbourne CBD, and the surrounding suburbs, just won't show any autogen no matter what setting I change it to, and I was dumbfounded. But then I decided to take my plane up for a spin, and lo and behold, the autogen started to appear as I flew closer to the area. So yeah.Anyway, on another note, I have received my XP10 discs two days ago, but unfortunately, one of the discs appears to be defective. Some of the files on that discs just can't be read no matter what I tried. I've tried it on two other DVD drives, and even on two laptops to no avail. I have contacted the LR tech support already and fortunately, they have agreed to send out a replacement disc free of charge, which is great.Regarding my Seattle pack, I don't have much to share at the moment. I've been preoccupied by some other games recently, and haven't really done much work on the pack. And Larry is still busy with work, I think. So yeah, nothing to see just yet. =P

Ha, I was finishing off the Wells Fargo Center when you posted those. Nice videos btw. And thanks again for your compliments. They certainly do provide some motivation. :)

Benny, that is absolutely incredible! Seattle looks a lot fuller with those shapefile buildings! Hopefully shapefiles for other countries that are lacking osm buildings are available (will be very handy). As for why downtown Seattle is that empty, I'm not sure why that happens, but that sometimes happens to me as well. Might be the gpu running out of vram? I dunno. Does it happen every time?@Steve, yeah, those flytampa converted sceneries looked stunning! I was drooling at those pics. lol

Well, I don't really have anything major to report or share just yet, but don't worry, Larry and I are still working on adding more buildings to Seattle. ;) It'll probably take a bit longer though, since he's been busy with work lately and I've got some other things to do as well.P.S. I gave in and finally ordered a copy of XP10 the other day. Have to wait a few weeks till it arrives though. =P

Impressive work, Benny! That looks amazing!

Thanks Steve. I guess I should continue working on the project (took a bit of time-off from it). As for why developers can't/won't do the same, it comes down to the time and budget constraints, I guess. LR only have a dozen or so people working on XP10 IIRC, so doing cityscapes at this level of detail, even if only for major cities, wouldn't really be feasible and would delay the release by quite some time. Also, the usage of google warehouse stuff (like my Seattle pack) would mean you can't sell it commercially (unless you "partner up" with Google, which might be expensive and complicated), so if LR wanted to do scenery at this level, they'd most likely have to look else where for the source/reference, or make it themselves. But I agree, they should've at least given the demo area some more attention so that it shows what the sim is capable of (though this could end up misleading people to think that the rest of the world is as detailed =P). That would be good news indeed.

I don't think there's currently any way to manipulate XP10's default "Plausible World". You can add stuff to it with the overlay editor, but you can't modify the default "autogen" buildings as far as I know.

Chip sure knows how to take good looking pics! The pic looks stunning!@Simon, welcome back. So I've heard, Wellington isn't all that dense, huh. Anyway, any hints on what your project with Chip is gonna be? ;)P.S. What an awesome epic end to the Australian Open!!

Thanks for the compliments guys! Much appreciated. :) The cranes would perhaps look better with a less vibrant shade of orange. I'll have a play around with it.@Simon, there are indeed lots and lots of sheeps in NZ (I've lived in Auckland for a few years before, though that was over 10 years ago). Perhaps you can bring one back as a souvenir? They'd make a great organic lawn mower, not to mention all the free manure you'd get, all in a cute and cuddly package! XD Hey, I know. Lets model some sheeps and put them in XP10. lol

Alright, an update, finally! I have released an update to my Seattle pack, which now includes, in addition to the aforementioned buildings, the Columbia Center, the Colman Terminal/Pier 52, the Washington State Ferries, and a couple of port cranes, as well as night textures for all buildings. The buildings mentioned here are done by Larry (who I am collaborating with).The new Seattle skyline.The skyline at night.And the cranes.Here's the link to the file.http://forums.x-plan...&showfile=15392@Wolfman and Mike, great to see more people adding to the world of XP10. :) It's not overly difficult, but it can be fairly time consuming depending on the complexity of the buildings.

Yep, trains are already modelled. There are even moving passenger trains, though I think they move too slow . And I concur with the rest of you. I can only see XP10 going up. It's only been a month, and there are already heaps of stuff over at the org. So in a years time, I'm sure the scenery will have been improved immensely.One thing I don't quite get regarding most people's take on XP10's "plausible" world is according to them, the plausible world is not realistic at all, yet in FS2004/FSX, the default autogen (which is also only plausible), is a lot more releastic? Sure, the landclass is more accurate in the default MSFS and it contains some real world landmarks/buildings, but the actual autogen/cities are still only an approximation (hence, "plausible"), right? And I've mainly only used the MSFS series in the past. But hey, lets not go there. Lets just say that given the choice between accurate buildings vs accurate roads, I'd take accurate roads anyday since they're much harder to implement, and any buildings you do get into XP10 will look more natural because of the accurate roads. Ok, end of "rant". @wb5okj, I agree that the cities are overall too green. Grey would make them look a lot more releastic.

That looks like a neon city! lol But it looks amazing! It seems like a lot of work getting them to work though... And I presume that those lights will add to the performance hit?Btw, thanks for the compliments guys. :)

Let there be light.The WaMu Center has been lit! Man, it took me ages to get it lit...I still have to light up the rest of my buildings, which I'm hoping to get done in the next few days.On a side note, here are three recent addition into XP10, one of which is done by the fellow scenery maker, Larry, who I'm currently collaborating with.The 1001 Fourth Avenue Plaza. It lacks a lobby/base, but since the original Google Warehouse model didn't come with one, I'm going to leave it as is for now.The US Bank Center.The Escala residential appartment. This one is done by Larry.And finally, a shot of my Seattle skyline.I'm planning to release these three additions, plus the night textures, in the second version of my package when I'm done with the night textures.

Ok, so here's my first attempt at lighting the Washington Mutual Tower.And it doesn't look too shabby. I'm still experimenting with the it though.

There are newer xplane2blender scripts? I'm currently using version 3.09 (from the marginal site) with blender 2.49b, which is working pretty well.Regarding Mike's question, I don't have an answer for your first question as I'm not familiar with reflection properties. With your second question, XP10 will recognize rounded/curved objects, though as you've said, an object with too many polygons will have an impact on the performance.

Yep, Simon has been making some incredible progress with his CBD stuff. Ain't it beautiful? The addition of dynamic lights is most interesting. I'll have to learn that from you sometime. ;) As for me, I'm currently in the process of collaborating with a fellow scenery maker to get some more rw Seattle buildings into XP10, and also working on night textures for my buildings. Don't know how long it will take, but progress is being made. :)

I've been thinking about that too, though it's not a modern city builder but rather a futuristic city building game. It might be interesting, though, getting some futuristic buildings mixed into, say, Seattle. :( About the feasibility of it, all the textures are there, but it seems like the buildings will have to be remodelled as I'm not sure what format they are in.. Yeah, they'll probably reserve the landmarks for their payware packages. And yep, it'll probably take a while just to do Seattle. Hopefully, more people will join in.

Might want to hold off on London for now since Aerosoft is supposedly working on the European areas, which will be distributed to all XP10 owners when it is released.Btw, I haven't done much work on XP10 lately due to recently buying and spending lots of time in the new city building game "ANNO 2070", which is highly addictive!.. :( Hopefully I'll get some more work done after the new year.

Yikes, 5 times the lot?! lol Your video looks surprisingly smooth considering how many skyscrapers you've put in. That's great!About my pack, the 6 buildings share 2 2048x2048 texture files between them, so 1 file for 3 buildings. I find that about 3 or 4 texture sets in a file gives the best result visually (with taller buildings), since if I add more textures into each file, I'd have to scale down the resolution of each texture piece, causing texture clarity to suffer overall. But yeah, I've heard that too. The less texture files you use, the better it should be performance wise.

Ok, I have just uploaded my package to x-plane.org. The link to the file is http://forums.x-plan...&showfile=15392. Enjoy. :)Btw, you guys can call me Steven.

Exciting times indeed. And yep, it sure does feels great to get it all working.I'll try and get my stuff uploaded in the next day or two.

I'm not sure if I'm interpreting the library file correctly, but it seems the first argument after EXPORT is where you want it to export to (a temp location perhaps?), and the second argument is where the file comes from, and it seems the paths are relative to where the library file is. Perhaps you can tryEXPORT ../Resources/bitmaps/world/clouds/smoke_puff.png texture/smoke_puff.pngorEXPORT texture/texture/smoke_puff.png texture/smoke_puff.pngJust a thought. Probably won't work though.

Hey, you're right. My images are failing to load. I can see the thumbnails, but they don't load when I enlarge them. And I can't seem to edit my post too. Weird.. Perhaps the forum maintenance did something to it. Anyway, I'll re-post the images here then (hopefully they'll load this time).The two Union Squares.And my seattle.I might upload my "addon" tomorrow then.Regarding your post, wow, those look great, especially the dusk shots! And with your filler buildings alongside the rw ones, it'd would look pretty spectacular!About the positioning, man, it takes a lot of trial and error, and time.. Move the building slightly, then wait 2-3 mins to see what they look like in-game, then repeat until they're accurate, which can easily take 10 mins to position one building.. Hopefully the new to-be released WED will make it easier. What I did, though, was to use my already placed custom buildings as guide/measurement.

Ok, after spending a lot of time modelling in blender, I've gotten two more buildings into my Seattle (probably the last 2 for now).The two Union Squares.What my Seattle looks like. :PWith these two buildings, I've actually re-modeled them from scratch in blender, using the original Google version only as guide. The main reason for this is that the original Google Earth version of the second Union Square (the taller one) had a base that is not uniform in height, and this was kinda hard to fix. The other being that it might be good practice for me. So I thought why not give blender a go. It wasn't easy, and it took me quite some hours to model and texture just the one building, but I think I'm getting the hang of modelling in blender. The result looked pretty close, if not, identical, to the original Google Earth version, which I'm pretty happy about. Of course, the other Union Square (the shorter one) was much easier to model in blender since it's basically a square column with a slight protrusion on the sides.Anyway, I'm gonna take a break with importing buildings and instead, gonna do some actual flying (in simulators, of course). :PBtw, if anyone is interested, I can upload what I've got to somewhere and people can try it out for themselves if they want, though I don't know how well this sits with Google's terms and conditions.. Any thoughts?