Jump to content

roesti

Members
  • Content Count

    79
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

63 Good

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    I belong to both VATSIM & IVAO
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

769 profile views
  1. They still work in v5. The only thing that doesn't work is the automatic scan like in P3Dv4, where it detects the airport and creates multiple views automatically. But I still can create them by hand, set the "availability radius" for example to 5nm once and I will have my views available everytime I load into that specific airport. Another method: If you had your views already set up in v4 and have those profiles, you can copy them over. I agree it was super conveniant with the automatic view creation, but I can live without it, since I adjust the views manually anyway afterwards. If there will ever be a MSFS CP, maybe they reintroduce this feature but I'd be still happy to "just" have the manual way available.
  2. Another great feature from Chaseplane I really miss: Custom Static Views, where you can save multiple views per airport. Set it up once, load / switch to it as you like easily. Basically like multiple Drone Camera Presets and for every airfield you like. There's nothing remotely comparable available in MSFS right now. Yes, I know how to handle the drone camera, I even bought an Xbox controller for it to make life easier (being more expensive than Chaseplane, but money aside, I had to wait months to get one in my country because the controllers were affected by shortages during COVID), still not better. I don't have the time to fly as much as in my past, but if I do, 80% of todays flights are in MSFS. But if occiasionally do a flight in P3D (because I want to fly heavy aircraft like the 747 or 777), I quickly realize how much is still missing from the MSFS camera system. For me, it doesn't matter really matter if these functions are built-in or available with an external software. But they're not available in the base simulator and the API still doesn't allow 3rd parties to come up with an own (optional) solution. People who used tools like Chaseplane only to set up a few cockpit views and bound it to the NumPad may not see a problem, and that's fine. But please stop "gatekeeping" people who prefer to have options by saying "I don't need it, so you won't need it too".
  3. If you use TAA, there should be a slider near there named "AMD FidelityFX Sharpening" (don't be confused of the "AMD", it works on NVIDIA cards too). So yes, it's an MSFS graphics setting. On my system, I've set it to 140. What it does is applying a sharpening filter on your image, making a blurry image more clear. But it's no magic and doesn't really increase resolution. If you increase it too much, it might look worse again and "too sharp". But it doesn't eat up much performance. The best possible AA settings is actually disable AA completely and pull up this "Render Scaling" Slider. What it does is rendering the picture at a higher resolution than your screen. For example, a setting of 120 will increase your resolution by 1.2X - the image then gets downscaled to your native resolution again, but the edges will be smoothed out really well without appearing blurry at all. This is called "downsampling" and the highest quality you can possibly get. Bu be aware: Increasing this setting is very demanding and challenges your GPU. I use render-scaling at 120% at a resultion of 1440p (+TAA). But I have to say, my hardware setup is probably above average and being able to handle fine with many settings on Ultra. On a more common / medium build I'd recommend to just use TAA + Sharpening. Nope, I use G-Sync. This is something your monitor and GPU needs to support. What it does is synchronizing the monitors refresh rate (Hz) to your FPS dynamically all the time which gives basically the same experience like V-Sync, but it doesn't matter if you get 80fps or 35, it more or less stays really smooth all time. If you don't have this option, turning on V-Sync is recommended. Be aware that you should choose your settings in a way so that you can easily achieve the desired frame rate. So with a 60Hz Monitor its 60FPS you want to aim for. If your computer can't achieve this FPS, V-Sync halves the FPS and it's suddenly not a good experience (worse smoothness / stuttering). For smoothness, one of those "Sync" technology should be enabled, it really helps. Some people even set their monitors to 30Hz and lock their FPS at 30 with V-Sync. For me personally, that's too low but many people have great experiences with this approach.
  4. It's a known issue (especially the ghosting), they are aware and try to work on it together with NVIDIA. They said they basically want to create some kind of masks around the instruments, so that they're not affected by DLSS. I hope they can achieve it but when I think about it, this sounds like a massive task and no easy problem to solve. DLSS is a technique that is applied to the whole 3D scene. It works very well with geometry. Glass Instruments, unfortunately, are just basic textures on a 3D object in this scene. The only difference between regular textures and this instrument panel is, the content of the "instrument texture" changes very fast. But I don't see any real possibility to exclude DLSS from single textures in the scene. There's only completely disabling it or live with the shortcomings of this AI feature. Let's see, maybe DLSS 3.0 (I can't really imagine, because it only improves FPS by creating new artificial frames - so normally, this would worsen the problem even more, but we don't know yet) or some kind of magic driver will do the trick. Normal games are not really affected by these kind of issues because most of the time you won't notice and you don't need this kind of preciseness / clearness on a display like you want to have in a flight simulation environment. It's the same with MSFS, in a wing / outside view, you won't encounter issues like this. But in the cockpit it becomes apparent. @Treetops45 (and anybody else with this problem like me) For the moment, if your computer can handle it, I recommend to disable DLSS and go back to TAA with sharpening. My sim performance in SU10 increased regardless of the implementation of DLSS and the older AA option work just fine for me. I know there are people who are not that bothered by this "instrument ghosting" effect and that's fine. Personally for me it makes instrument flying unusable and I'm glad I can just use the sim without DLSS to avoid this. P.S.: Just to avoid confusions - this issue still exists with the newest Studio Driver (517.40)
  5. Different opinions are certainly allowed, but I struggle to get your point here. You said to him - "Guess you can’t learn it. Your loss, really. 🤷🏻‍♂️" and I ask myself if this type of interaction is really neccessary here. I for myself, I learned the MSFS camera system and get around with it. Still, I think it's an inferior solution to what was (or still is) available in older simulators. I'd be happy if a software like Chaseplane returns. People who think otherwise can just continue using the current implementation of the built-in camera system and don't need to buy these kind of addons if they're happy with default, if Asobo ever decided to open up / implement this API. You said you're surprised that people can fly complex airlines but have difficulties with the camera system. In my opinion, these are two different things and a better option for the camera system is just a question of convenience./ comfort and has nothing to do with piloting skills. IRL no pilot has to deal with a "camera", he just moves his head around. A camera system in a 3D software, needed in programs like MSFS is actually just another added difficulty layer people in real life never have to deal with. Maybe you can compare it with having a dishwasher. I certainly don't need it to clean the dishes and can do it by hand. But I'm glad there's an option available for me to buy a dishwasher to make my life easier. And people who think a dishwasher is unneccessary just don't buy one and save the money. But they're not affected by the existence of dishwashers. Reading arguments like "I'm fine with the original camera system, it's your problem if you're not" is like demanding to stop producing dish washers (or the possibility of developing one in the first place). Basically for me it reads like you invalidate his opinion because you personally don't encounter / see / need it. Maybe this wasn't your intention and I just got it wrong. Like I said, I see valid reasons for a custom camera solution to exist and explained it in another post. If you don't feel like you need 3rd party solution, don't use it. Of course all this talk is just hypothetical if Asobo never opens up the API. Thanks for your insights Lorby (love your tools), I guess we will have to wait a little bit longer to see a return of this functionality. If it ever returns..
  6. I agree with you. While I somehow get along with MSFS camera system, I miss chaseplane very much. Way easier, way more comfortable.. Copy & Pasting profiles of planes and just make small adjustments instead of recreating everything for every plane model. No need to edit camera.cfg files to be able to set up wing views properly on some planes, way more camera views possible with using modifier keys, etc. And much more. Weather like Active Sky (historical) is the next on the list, but for now I'd just be happy to get chaseplane back. I don't know why Asobo doesn't open up the API for this. I get that it may be harder due to licensing stuff with the weather engine they're using, but custom cameras? Come on, please make it possible. People who are fine with the default system can still be happy and just don't buy Chaseplane if they don't need it. It won't negatively affect anybody if they give us this option.
  7. @B777ER Wow, okay. I'm surprised seeing this really sad form of "forum vendetta" from a professional business, don't know how to say better.. maybe speechless fits more. I don't think it's necessary to comment on details, but this certainly isn't how any conversation between adult people or customer / supplier interaction should take place. Passive aggressiveness, judging the personality of a customer. Sigh. I get it, we are all people and sometimes have some bad day or two. But most of the time I guess it's better to take a breath when you encounter anger, wait 5 minutes or maybe an hour and think about what you wanted to say after the first impulse, and then reconsider. That's just some advice I can give to this company personally. I'm thankful for the products delivered by PMDG in the past. They were incredible by their times and I think nobody can deny they brought innovation to the flight simulation community many times. But this doesn't justify this kind of behaviour. I can understand that RSR is most likely kind of emotionally involved in his projects and feels like he constantly needs to defend his decisions. Still I think a normal and healthy conversation about issues (even if PMDG denies it) needs to be possible. Maybe it's time to take a gap year (or two) of his business, get some distance and re-evaluate everything, coming back after getting some rest after all those years of hard work. Or discuss internally about some kind of new strategy regarding public relations, so he stays more in the background and delegate communction to somebody more capable in the field of social skills. This kind of communcation strategy is just not fitting for the year 2022, I'm sorry and am puzzled about how a company, really capable of doing great stuff when it comes to developing great add-ons for years, is acting totally weird on the communications side. Last thoughts: Even if RSR thinks he is correct with his point of view (and maybe he is, for me he isn't), he's totally wrong in how to handle these kind of things.
  8. When reading stuff like this.. .. I wonder if he rather should follow his own advice. Maybe it's just me, but it reads like projecting his own "issues" (I don't see any in asking some simple questions) onto loyal customers. Don't know if this is a smart decision, but it's his company of course. I for myself won't ever buy anything from this company again, that's my decision then. Thanks for the insights, after seeing people getting banned for trying to just asking questions about a topic which needs obviously some clarification, I only can shake my head. Good to know though, move on. I'm sure there will be some other developer in the future happily taking over the "Boeing add-on market" in the future. I can wait.
  9. You can either try to get a used boxed version of this (Concorde X, Aerosoft sold it in the past) on eBay / Amazon (just checked there is a listing on eBay US and Amazon, not that expensive). Be aware you can't use this with P3D v4+.. or you'll have the patience and wait for the new 64-bit version which is currently in development - though nobody knows when it releases. I think these are the only options you have, I'm afraid.
  10. There's also the option to create an exclusion file with ADE. I remember doing it for this specific airport, but I realized you have to be careful, becasue if you just draw one big rectangle aroundthe airport, many of the houses nearby will vanish as well. The process is not that hard, maybe 10 minutes of work: - Load up the AFCAD file in ADE - Draw smaller exclusion rectangles instead a big one along the runways, then compile with the option "separate BGL" files. You can then just take the "obj.bgl" as exclusion file, copy it to the scenery folder and ignore your compiled AFCAD I don't know if sharing an exclusion file is allowed here on this forum, but feel free to send me a PM if you want, then I can give you the file I created myself and test if it works for you. (It's just a 4KB big .bgl you have to move to your LICJ scenery folder)
  11. To be fair, I manually converted many of older scenery stuff that doesn't come with add-on.xml support on my own. Usually, it's not that of a big deal because scenery stuff uses a common structure. But it can take some time, it's work you have to at least to do once. But I promise if you invest this time, you'll never have issues again. This is something that most of the time only applies to "older stuff" so it probably doesn't get updates anymore. So after you've done it, you take it from one P3D version to the next one and never have to deal with it again. I did this work years ago and still enjoy the benefits. Feel free to tell me which kind of scenery you refer to, maybe I've got it as well and already have done the work or if can offer some help if you're interested in "tyding up" your scenery libraries 😉
  12. Yeah, but they're all updated to run on the current client version, so I don't see any problem here. I agree with others here that if you set up most of your stuff outside of the sim (which can be kind of tedious to do especially for older "non officially" compatible things like scenery, but you only have to do it once), reinstalling P3D is not a big issue. I also highly recommend using Lorby's Add-on Organizer as already mentioned. I explained it multiple times here on the forums how you can keep even the stuff that installs in your P3D main directory. Just uninstall P3D correctly (each component individually) and reinstall to the same folder. Then update / reinstall the remaining stuff: FFTF: Install the update and run it, done ChasePlane: Update and run it, done EnvShade: Update, start EnvDir, Re-Apply to the Sim, done ASP3D: Install the Update, update the connector if it asks for it, done Maybe do a "resync" via ORBX central after all of that, but even this isn't really necessary if you just backup your terrain.cfg. A full reinstall of P3D does only take some minutes for me and everything works like before, but of course it depends on what you actually use. It's true that some add-ons aren't initally compatible after LM releases a new version, but currently everything of the major stuff should just work. I'm still surprised that people fear to update because there seems to be so much "of trouble" by doing it. Maybe I'm just lucky by rarely having any kind of issues. /shrug And I'd consider my P3D installation as "heavily customized" (currently 150+ add-ons via add-on.xml + the remaining stuff that can't be plugged into the sim this way).
  13. Yes. Just uninstall every component of P3D one by one (Client, Scenery and Content). If you do it like this, you should end up with a P3D Main folder just containing your custom files from your add-ons like PMDG folders, etc. You can then install P3D again in this exact folder and everything should work like before. Have in mind if you use add-ons that replace original files like textures (Envtex e.g.), you have to reapply those again afterwards, but this should be the only exception. Reinstalling P3D is usually no big deal nowadays, especially if you have most of your stuff in your addons folder.
  14. Yeah, that's what I'd suggested to you to look after, the reflection settings. Maddog looks "fine" to me, you can see how the seat is reflected in the displays of your aircraft. Quality depends on how far you push the slider to the right. I personally don't use dynamic reflections at all because they used to be very demanding on the GPU side and there have been issues in the past especially with PMDG aircraft and certain surfaces like engine nacelles. If you didn't know, you still have reflections if you disable "dynamic reflections" but a default / static reflection map is used, which is total fine for me personally as it looks good enough. The A330 cockpit is super glossy and I think almost every surface is kind of reflective so it doesn't seem uncommon that you get a behaviour like this.
  15. I load Active Sky before P3D, doing my flight planning with PFPX etc. and load the flight plan into Active Sky. After that, I start P3D and it works without any issues. If you think weather depiction is not correct, you can click on the "debug" button on the left side in Active Sky and hit the "refresh weather" button, then it should reload everything. For me, that's not really necessary. AS works without a flight plan, but weather is more accurate if you load it in. The only issues I've got sometimes is that there is rain reported and it's not raining in the sim or vice versa. But nothing critical. I fly exclusively with EA on and volumetric clouds.
×
×
  • Create New...