FSDreamTeam forum
Products Support => EuroAirport Basel => Topic started by: virtuali on August 05, 2020, 10:51:07 am
-
Today Microsoft has given permissions to share screenshots of products in development. Here's some from Basel, which will likely be the first one to be released. Some info:
- The scenery will be the first one to be released for MSFS 2020 ( O'Hare V2 will likely be the next one ), because it's our latest release, so it was already designed to be 100% PBR, and will use native capabilities of the new sim when required, like sloped runways, animated jetways, new types of glass reflections and realtime ambient occlusion.
- Due to the very efficient lighting engine of MSFS 2020, the night lighting is completely dynamic. Almost every lamp post or fixture in the scenery got a DL. We were unable to measure any effects on performance so far, this is likely due to the sim using Deferred Rendering, which allows for a far higher number of DL before fps will be affected.
- About fps, we don't seem to notice much difference compared to the default airport for the same area.
-
Umberto,
Any idea whether Airport Facilities are still controlled by *bgl OR it's completely new structure (*)
(*) I'm thinking forward about ADE future capabilities within MSFS2020
-
Excellent work. This looks very promising!
-
Looking good.
-
Umberto,
Any idea whether Airport Facilities are still controlled by *bgl OR it's completely new structure (*)
(*) I'm thinking forward about ADE future capabilities within MSFS2020
I too am hoping the AI traffic has been improved
-
Looking very much forward to this! I have learned to fly on this airport many many years ago. Is there any estimated date for the release?
-
Looking very much forward to this! I have learned to fly on this airport many many years ago. Is there any estimated date for the release?
It's not very far, but we'll released KORD first, and LFSB next.
-
Ok sounds great! Thanks a lot for all of your work!
-
Any update yet on a release date?
-
Looking very much forward to this! I have learned to fly on this airport many many years ago. Is there any estimated date for the release?
It's not very far, but we'll released KORD first, and LFSB next.
Since this statement was made two further sceneries have been released (Key West & Vancouver)...
Seeing that the original statement was that LFSB was going to be the FIRST scenery to be released for MSFS I am starting to loose faith in FSDT...
-
Since this statement was made two further sceneries have been released (Key West & Vancouver)...
Seeing that the original statement was that LFSB was going to be the FIRST scenery to be released for MSFS I am starting to loose faith in FSDT...
FSDT is just one guy that does everything. Key West and Vancouver are NOT made by the same author as LFSB. We said LSFB was *likely* the first scenery, but that doesn't mean anything, if we have something else ready, we should stop it "just" because we said LFSB MIGHT have come first.
It will surely come before the end of the month.
-
Great news! We're looking forward to it a lot! Thanks a lot for all the work you guys put into those projects!
-
Should be this weekend as Umberto promised.
-
Umberto, keep up the great work.
We love what you do and the passion you put into it!
:) ;D
-
We are still doing the finishing touches ( and improve the scenery along the way, did many additions compared to the P3D version ) so, it's not going to be out this weekend ( I'm posting this on Sunday night...), but it's going to be a few days more.
-
No problem, thanks for keeping us updated!
-
The MSFS installer is ready, we sent emails to all registered customers. In any case, the download is on the Download page as well, in case you missed the email. Just use your existing activation key from the P3D version, and you'll be good to go.
-
Hi and thanks for the free version of LFSB in MSFS. I loved this airport already in P3Dv4.
Question regarding installaion into MSFS, as I am not yet very familar with installing addons there.
When starting the downloaded exe file for LFSB it installs to my C drive by default and I find a new entry MSFS under the Addon Manager folder where I can locate the FSDT LFSB scenery.
However, my MSFS is installed in a separate SSD drive H and the few addons I installed so far (mainly new liveries for aircraft) I had to install in the MSFSPackages community folder.
Going to LFSB in MSFS I did not see your scenery (only default buildings). Do I have to select another path when installing the FSDT LFSB scenery for MSFS? Or do I have to transfer the installed files under the addon manager manually into the community folder of MSFS in my H drive?
Thanks
Walter
-
I have the same problem as Walter even though I installed Addon manager on my (D:) SSD drive where my Steam bought MSFS resides. I did manually move Basel airport to community folder and it works.
-
Worked fine for me using the installer and the Steam version.
It looks absolutely great, thanks a lot for your work! Already did about 10 take offs and landings in different day/night, weather etc.!
-
Works perfect. THX! Now waiting for GSX... #staysafe
-
I have the same problem as Walter even though I installed Addon manager on my (D:) SSD drive where my Steam bought MSFS resides. I did manually move Basel airport to community folder and it works.
Please don't do this, because now you lost the ability to get updates. The installer will work regardless which drive the sim is installed to, and regardless which version of the sim you have, and regardless if your community folder is not in the same drive as the simulator.
The installer will install into the Addon Manager\MSFS folder, and will just create a shortcut to the Community folder, which is what allows to see the scenery in the sim.
-
I have the same problem as Walter even though I installed Addon manager on my (D:) SSD drive where my Steam bought MSFS resides. I did manually move Basel airport to community folder and it works.
Please don't do this, because now you lost the ability to get updates. The installer will work regardless which drive the sim is installed to, and regardless which version of the sim you have, and regardless if your community folder is not in the same drive as the simulator.
The installer will install into the Addon Manager\MSFS folder, and will just create a shortcut to the Community folder, which is what allows to see the scenery in the sim.
Well as long as your installer don't create that shortcut I have to install the airport manually to be able to use it. I have a support request where I explain further. Everything is installed correctly it's just the shortcut that isn't created. The problem is with the installer.
-
Well as long as your installer don't create that shortcut I have to install the airport manually to be able to use it. I have a support request where I explain further. Everything is installed correctly it's just the shortcut that isn't created. The problem is with the installer.
The installer surely creates the shortcut so no, the problem is not the installer but, most likely something in your system, like an antivirus or something else, which prevented it to do what it usually does, that is creating the shortcut automatically.
-
Thanks Umberto for your input.
I tried to install again, turning off the antivirus (Avira). Installation runs without problem, scenery goes to drive C (Addon Manager/MSFS), but scenery still not visible in MSFS (installed in drive H).
When I manually copy "fsdreamteam-airport-lsfb-basel"-file from C to the community file of MSFS in drive H, the scenery works perfectly and is there (awesome by the way!)
So, somehow the shortcut appears not to be created during the installation. Can I check this shortcut somewhere?
My MSFS is a CD/Microsoft Shop installation.
Walter
-
So, somehow the shortcut appears not to be created during the installation. Can I check this shortcut somewhere?
That seems to be the problem, the installer surely creates the shortcut so no, the problem is not the installer but, most likely something in your system, like an antivirus or something else, which prevented it to do what it usually does, that is creating the shortcut automatically.
There's not much to check, the shortcut is there, or it's not. The installer doesn't do anything strange or unusual, it simply runs the standard command to create a directory Junction. Have you seen any errors from the installer ?
-
No, there was absolutly no error message during the installation.
The only thing that I could imagine that this has something to do with it: Like many other users of MSFS I installed from CD's and the updates from Microsoft Shop.
When starting MSFS I sometimes needed to insert the CD1 for checking, however, with creating a ISO-drive from CD1, I do not need to insert the CD anymore.
I know many other users have also this setup.
Could this prevent the shortcut from being processed correctly?
Walter
-
Could this prevent the shortcut from being processed correctly?
I don't think so. In early Alpha versions, Microsoft used a different application ID for the CD and the MS Store version, but this has been abandoned for the release ( at least this is what Asobo told me, I never seen the CD version ), so they both share the same app id so, from the installer point of view, they are exactly the same. If the sim wasn't recognized, the installer wouldn't even proceed.
Just to be sure, do you have this file ?
%LOCALAPPDATA%\Packages\Microsoft.FlightSimulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalCache\Content.OPT
If yes, go to the last line, and tell me where the InstalledPackagesPath line points to:
InstalledPackagesPath "xxxxxxx"
-
Why no animated people on Basel for MSFS?
KEYW has several animated people, which I liked.
-
The path that I found in drive c:
user\Walter\AppData\Local\Packages\Microsoft.FlightSimulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalCache\ has a file named Content.xml (not Content.OPT)
there the last line reads like this:
<Package name="fsdreamteam-airport-lfsb-basel" active="true"/>
I attach the whole Content.xml file for your info
Thanks, Walter
-
Could this prevent the shortcut from being processed correctly?
I don't think so. In early Alpha versions, Microsoft used a different application ID for the CD and the MS Store version, but this has been abandoned for the release ( at least this is what Asobo told me, I never seen the CD version ), so they both share the same app id so, from the installer point of view, they are exactly the same. If the sim wasn't recognized, the installer wouldn't even proceed.
Just to be sure, do you have this file ?
%LOCALAPPDATA%\Packages\Microsoft.FlightSimulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalCache\Content.OPT
If yes, go to the last line, and tell me where the InstalledPackagesPath line points to:
InstalledPackagesPath "xxxxxxx"
I don't have the \Microsoft.FlightSimulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe file at all at least not under that path. Steam/Microsoft handled my installation of MSFS. I've done nothing except creating a folder called SteamLibrary on my SSD (D:) and pointing the installation to it as you can do on Steam. This was immediately after release on 18th of August. Everything has been working well so far until this Directory Junction debacle.
-
Why no animated people on Basel for MSFS? KEYW has several animated people, which I liked.
There are animated people, of course, but they are all located at the LaBelvedere spotting places. The P3D version of Basel has more animated people ( walking inside terminals too), because they were created by GSX.
Of course, when we'll be able to get GSX to MSFS, lots of features will come back again.
-
Hi Umberto
Did you find something wrong with the content.xml file that I attached in my last posting?
Thanks, Walter
-
Why no animated people on Basel for MSFS? KEYW has several animated people, which I liked.
There are animated people, of course, but they are all located at the LaBelvedere spotting places. The P3D version of Basel has more animated people ( walking inside terminals too), because they were created by GSX.
Of course, when we'll be able to get GSX to MSFS, lots of features will come back again.
Thanks!
-
The path that I found in drive c:
user\Walter\AppData\Local\Packages\Microsoft.FlightSimulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalCache\ has a file named Content.xml (not Content.OPT)
Sorry, I said Content.OPT, but there's no such file, it's UserCFG.OPT.
-
Thanks Umberto
The last entry in the UserCFG.OPT file is the following:
}
InstalledPackagesPath "H:\Users\Walter\AppData\Local\MSFSPackages"
-
And I guess that folder is where you Community folder is located ?
Could you please ZIP the file and Attach it to a post, so I can check for other things, like file encoding, or anything else that might have prevented the installer from reading it ?
-
Yes, that's right, my community folder is there .... and copying the Basle scenery there manually made it show up correctly in MSFS (but I understand for updates this is not a good solution).
Attached the zipped UserCFG.OPT file
-
Yes, that's right, my community folder is there .... and copying the Basle scenery there manually made it show up correctly in MSFS (but I understand for updates this is not a good solution).
Please clarify if you had a shortcut to the Addon Manager folder there ( so you copied over it ), of there wasn't anything related to the scenery.
-
Do I understand you right? You mean in the Community folder I should have had a shortcut to the Addon Manager after running the installer for Basle scenery?
I am absolutely sure that at that point I did not have any shortcut or folder that related to the Addon Manager or a FSDreamteam folder in the Community folder and I guess that's the reason why the scenery did not show up.
So when I copied the fsdreamteam-airport-lfsb-basle folder manually into the Community folder I did not overwrite anything (there was also no message indicating this).
-
Do I understand you right? You mean in the Community folder I should have had a shortcut to the Addon Manager after running the installer for Basle scenery?
Yes, that's what the installer does.
I am absolutely sure that at that point I did not have any shortcut or folder that related to the Addon Manager or a FSDreamteam folder in the Community folder and I guess that's the reason why the scenery did not show up.
Of course, without such shortcut, the scenery is just not there. Something must have prevented the installer from creating the link, most likely a permission problem on the Community folder, or possibly the antivirus.
-
ok, thanks. I thought I did run the installer with Antivirus turned off, but will check again and also try to find out whether there is some permission issue on the community folder.
-
What a beautiful scenery ! A real pleasure to land here !
But...
FS2020 assigned me the gate F4A. A place which is really not very smart to be to disembark my passengers, with an A320 ! No jetway, no Ladder truck ! No joy LOL !
Is there a way, by editing a file, to avoid this stupid FS2020 to assign me this location in the future ?
-
Is there a way, by editing a file, to avoid this stupid FS2020 to assign me this location in the future ?
That gate is configured as a gate, otherwise MSFS 2020 will populate it with GA airplanes and GA vehicles, which of course would be wrong, since that's NOT a GA parking spot. Next time you might get another gate, it's not entirely clear how a gate is chosen but, I guess it's a random selection between all gates that fits your airplane and are not already taken.
-
Thanks Umberto,
In the meantimes, I got a solution: I can choose the arrival gate while creating the flightplan in FS editor, something I did knew. Ok, this not the best solution, as to exclude some inapropriate gates, to your taste, would have being a better solution, by maintaining the more realistic randomness of the choice, but anyway it is better than nothing.
-
Ok, this not the best solution, as to exclude some inapropriate gates, to your taste, would have being a better solution, by maintaining the more realistic randomness of the choice, but anyway it is better than nothing.
It would be wrong to exclude a parking that in real life exists, just because you "might" be assigned to it. It's much better you configure the gate in the flight plan, so it's not random.
-
Sorry, Umberto, but that isn't my opinion.
To my humble view, to force a specific gate in the flightplan isn't realistic at all, but is actually the only solution available to avoid this no sense to be sent to obviously inapropriate places, because, the choice of the gate by FS AI, is most probably, just a very simplistic random choice, made of rough & incomplete criterias.
Take an other example: In EDDK, they are several places, where they dismounted the gateway some years ago, because low-cost company do not wanted them. So these gates are reserved to certain low-cost company. I bet what you want, that, FS AI will not check if the company who belong my aircraft is suitable or not for these special gates. As a former FS dev in the time of FS2004, I remember vaguely that it was possible to specify companies to specific gates, but I don't remember, in fact, if FS2004 was really taking this info in account.
-
Sorry, Umberto, but that isn't my opinion.
You can have your opinion, but that doesn't prevent me to say I think ( in MY opinion ) that your opinion is wrong.
To my humble view, to force a specific gate in the flightplan isn't realistic at all, but is actually the only solution available to avoid this no sense to be sent to obviously inapropriate places, because, the choice of the gate by FS AI, is most probably, just a very simplistic random choice, made of rough & incomplete criterias.
It's a proper workaround within the limitations of how THIS simulator works. Which in MY opinion is better than the alternatives, which would be either defining those spots as "GA" ( so you'll see small GA planes and equipment there, which is wrong ), or removing the parking spots entirely, which is even worse.
As a former FS dev in the time of FS2004, I remember vaguely that it was possible to specify companies to specific gates, but I don't remember, in fact, if FS2004 was really taking this info in account.
We obviously included airline codes for all the main gates, and the one you said should never used ( F4A ) doesn't have any. But yes, those codes are usually used only for AI, I'm not sure if they have any effect the parking assigned to the user airplane.
This is SUPPOSED to be controlled by this line in the aircraft.cfg
atc_parking_codes = "" ; Comma separated and may be as small as one character each
There isn't a single default airplane that has any of these defined, mostly because no real world liveries are included with the sim so, if you downloaded extra liveries, check if they have the atc_parking_codes lines with correct codes, MAYBE they work.
But even if they don't, I don't generally agree to the method of purposely feeding the simulator with wrong data ( removing parking spots, setting to wrong sizes on purpose ) just to overcome its shortcomings ESPECIALLY with a simulator that is in constant active development like MSFS 2020, I think it's best to include data as accurate as possible to real life, even if the sim doesn't handle it yet, because it *might* in a future upgrade, so we don't want to be left with wrong data put there on purpose we would have to fix again, after an update might finally solve the problem.
So, for the time being, just select your gate on the flight plan.
-
Umberto, in this case, it is typically a question of personal taste. Therefore, nobody can say the other is wrong !
If I pretend the Effel tower is only 150m high, then you can affirm I am wrong !
So, speaking of personnal taste, I would prefer to discover which gate the tower assign to me (to have the salt of the surprise, if you wish), rather than to known it in advance. But, of course, preferably a good surprise ! Not a bad one, where you have to go to some silly inappropriate place !
In my old time of FS2004, as I was flying almost always with my MD-11, I have edited all the airports I was using often, so that the size of the MD-11 was accepted only where it was appropriate to be, to my opinion. So maybe it was all wrong, but it was how I wanted it to be and it was not possible in FS2004, to specify the arrival gate in the flight plan.
This just a game, after all !
By the way Umberto, I am waiting with great hope, that you make an FS2020 version of your beautiful LSGG Geneva, which is my "mother airport".
-
I have a problem at LFSB since the latest patch. When I‘m in external view all the glass textures disappear from certain angles (also when relatively close by). In the drone view this doesn‘t seem to happen, even from the same angle and distance. The same occurs in VR. Most of the times all the glass is gone and only from some angles it reappears. I haven‘t encountered this at LSZH (same settings, same flight). Is there anything I can do about it?
-
I have a problem at LFSB since the latest patch. When I‘m in external view all the glass textures disappear from certain angles (also when relatively close by). In the drone view this doesn‘t seem to happen, even from the same angle and distance. The same occurs in VR. Most of the times all the glass is gone and only from some angles it reappears. I haven‘t encountered this at LSZH (same settings, same flight). Is there anything I can do about it?
Same problem for me. When I zoom out slightly, parts of the buildings disappear. When I zoom in again the buildings are complete again.
-
It's possible the latest update has tweaked LOD settings somehow, reducing them to optimize fps further, likely because of VR.
-
I confirm these problems !
So, Umberto, what are-you going to do ?
Can we expect a correction soon ?
-
I confirm these problems ! So, Umberto, what are-you going to do ?
It would have been easier if more accurate reports would be given.
Assuming the problem IS related to LOD and a change of it in the last update ( which should be verified first ), LOD depends on so many factors:
- Screen resolution, the lower, the earlier objects will disappear
- Screen aspect ratio
- Zoom setting
- The sim settings
- Personal preference. I don't mind LOD. In fact, I find LOD to be an indication of a scenery optimization. It takes effort to ADD LOD, by default there aren't any LOD in a scenery, and releasing a scenery without LOD shows the developer has been lazy, not caring about optimization ( it takes LESS effort to create a scenery with no LODs )
Can we expect a correction soon ?
As usual, assuming there IS a correction needed on our site, the more accurate the reports are, the more likely issues can be fixed, assuming they can. I could only try with the few information given, which is "all the glass gone from some angles in external view".
So, I tried it now, started with the default A320 at Gate 5, and manually taxied in External view, try to look the plane from different angles, and no glass ever disappeared. Yes, there's some flickering on the SkyLounge dome, but this is a known issue which cannot be completely fixed, but nothing disappeared.
So, it would be best if more precise reports could come, like a screenshot or a video and some data about settings like screen resolution, etc.
-
Dear Umberto,
Maybe try this:
With the A320, go to gate 34, then, go to outside view and turn the camera in direction of the tower.
OK, now, zoom backward and you will see a whole parts of almost all buildings which will disappear !
I would be very surprised if you don't have the problem either, but if it is the case, tell me and I will publish a screenshot of it on my site and put the link here.
-
With the A320, go to gate 34, then, go to outside view and turn the camera in direction of the tower.
OK, now, zoom backward and you will see a whole parts of almost all buildings which will disappear !I would be very surprised if you don't have the problem
That's it, zoom is as wide as it can go, no problems whatsoever.
-
Hi Umberto,
Look this video and you will see the problem:
In the video descriptor, you can read my computer & graphic settings.
When I am in the outside view and I have turned a little bit the camera (something not mandatory), I just use the mouse wheel to zoom in and out and you can see the result on the video.
Hope this help !
-
I have this problem also - with my settings most of the terminal disappears entirely (like shown in the YouTube video above) even on takeoff from the airport and doesn't appear until you are RIGHT on top of the terminal.
LODs are great, but it seems that this update and/or my settings make this airport's terminal glass disappear.
I will play with various settings - I don't encounter this at Vancouver for example.
Thanks,
Steve
-
I still get the issue, despite buildings on "ultra" etc.
If it helps, the Drzweicki Design Seattle has also begun appearing distorted etc. until right on top of it and I believe they indicated that the update had "done something to the LODs, we need to fix".
Steve
-
When I am in the outside view and I have turned a little bit the camera (something not mandatory), I just use the mouse wheel to zoom in and out and you can see the result on the video.
That's precisely why in the screenshot I posted, I showed the External camera user interface, which shows zoom level at 0%, which is the same as if you rolled back on the mouse wheel all the way back.
What you are looking at is surely LOD.
Somebody else said something about the glass materials, but in your video it's not affecting just glass, but everything else disappears too.
I think the issue might just be your screen resolution a bit lower than the one on my screenshot, which was 2145x1191, while your screen is 1920x1080.
By reducing the window size to 1920x1080, I can replicate the problem ONLY from 0% to 1% of the Zoom level, as soon as I go to 2% and up, it's all normal so, it seems the small difference in size didn't allowed to see the last two 1/100ths of the whole zoom range, but it could on my system with just a bit more screen size.
Problem is, we must optimize the scenery for a wide range of users, and I fear a setting that would gave back those two 1/100th of the zoom range for 1080p users, would make LOD basically not-existent for 1440p and 4K users who need it more
Note that, this is NOT just dependent on the screen resolution, but also by "Objects Level of Detail" setting.
Try to run the FSDT Live Update now, I've tweaked it a bit, and with 1080p resolution and Object Level of Detail" at 100, it doesn't disappear at 0% Zoom level anymore.
In any case, I still believe that demanding LOD won't ever show up, even at extremely wide zoom settings, is like defeating LOD's purpose, since by optimizing it for the wide zoom levels, we make it useless when it really matters: on realistic zoom settings used during flight and approach, where fps matters the most.
-
It's much better now but from some disctance and angles it still happens:
https://i.imgur.com/u76hsFm.jpg (https://i.imgur.com/u76hsFm.jpg)
In VR it's much more extreme, even though it seems to be slightly better now as well:
https://i.imgur.com/XRwTd3x.jpg (https://i.imgur.com/XRwTd3x.jpg)
-
Unfortunately, I cannot test, because I bought LFSB on the Marketplace and the Content Manager say that the addon is up to date to version 1.1.1. I have "FSDT live update" which was installed when I bought LSZH directly to you, but it does not include the support of LFSB.
I had the "Object level of details" set to 50 and I tested now with 100, and in this case, at gate 34, building do not disappear anymore on the whole zoom range.
Nevertheless, it seem strange to me that the distance to the object is not the preponderant parameter in this case and it is a bit bad to be forced to use 100 fo "Object level of details", as to reduce this value is known to giving a bit more FPS for low to middle range PC.
Maybe, with your actual tweaking, I will still be able to reduce a bit this parameter.
Can-you update the Marketplace so I can download the new version from there ?
-
It's much better now but from some disctance and angles it still happens:
As I've said, I still believe that demanding LOD won't ever show up, even at extremely wide zoom settings, is like defeating LOD's purpose, since by optimizing it for the wide zoom levels, we make it useless when it really matters: on realistic zoom settings used during flight and approach, where fps matters the most.
So, just zoom in a bit.
-
I had the "Object level of details" set to 50 and I tested now with 100, and in this case, at gate 34, building do not disappear anymore on the whole zoom range.
That's to be expected.
Nevertheless, it seem strange to me that the distance to the object is not the preponderant parameter in this case and it is a bit bad to be forced to use 100 fo "Object level of details", as to reduce this value is known to giving a bit more FPS for low to middle range PC.
That's how default LOD always worked with every version of the sim.
The distance doesn't have a direct effect, it's the object SIZE in PIXELS that matters, and it's a relationship between its full size as modeled, and the size as displayed ( which depends on distance AND your screen resolution ). And with MSFS, there's another parameter, which is the Object Level of Detail, which affects if further so, for example, if you set it to 50%, all LOD will be half as visible compared to how we made them.
Can-you update the Marketplace so I can download the new version from there ?
We cannot update the Marketplace ourselves. We can only send the updated scenery to Microsoft, which will go through approval first, and then it will be released. The time it takes to do this is not under our control, and right now the MS Marketplace team is on holidays until January 5th, so they won't accept any new submissions before that date.
-
Umberto,
Thanks again for all your interesting technical explanations, but from a customer perpective, I only see that on all the other payware sceneries airport addon I own, including your LSZH, Basel is the only one which have this pretty bad problem (major parts of building disappearing when zoom is set near max backward pos).
I have just tested that right now:
I set again "objects level of detail" to 50 and verified that I had the problem again on LFBS, which was the case. Then, I went on my other payware airport sceneries, on almost 2 different gates, and checked if I had parts disappearing when I change the zoom factor in outside view. None of them had this problem, including your LSZH as I said already. So, for me, it is clear that there is a way to design airport sceneries without this problem and it is for me, the only thing which count. Period.
Nevertheless, I have also tested the impact on my system, to have "objects level of detail" set to default 100 setting and I must say that I don't remarked a noticable impact on the framerate. So, I decided to adopt this default setting now, so I don't have anymore the problem on LFBS.
Speaking of Shack95, I am curious, does the pictures he published here, revealed an other "glass problem" which I didn't remarked myself ?
Finally, the most important is that your airports sceneries are really beautiful, so thanks for that !!!
... and if you adapt LSGG to FS2020, my gratitude will be enormous ! :)
-
Thanks again for all your interesting technical explanations, but from a customer perpective, I only see that on all the other payware sceneries airport addon I own, including your LSZH, Basel is the only one which have this pretty bad problem (major parts of building disappearing when zoom is set near max backward pos).
I'm not sure what else you expect we do. We HAVE made a change to the scenery, and if you read the answers of other users that tried it, it was labeled as being "much improved".
The problem is you cannot get the update yet, because you bought it on the MS Marketplace so, it will take some time before you'll be able to get it, but you WILL get it too. Right now, there's the added issue of the MS Marketplace team being on holidays until Jan 5th, so in this case it will take longer than usual but again, how do you expect we should do about that ?
[I set again "objects level of detail" to 50 and verified that I had the problem again on LFBS, which was the case. Then, I went on my other payware airport sceneries, on almost 2 different gates, and checked if I had parts disappearing when I change the zoom factor in outside view.
And what this exactly adds to the whole discussion ? You are using an OUTDATED version, we already fixed that so, what's the point of continuing to repeat the object disappears too early at object level of detail 50 ?
And note that, even after you'll eventually get the fix, the buildings will STILL disappear at extreme wide settings, just later than with the version you have.
That's how the LOD works in MSFS: all distances are reduced by that slider percentage, and that's how supposed to work because, what that slider does is to reduce LODs to increase performance.
It seems you want to eat your cake and having it too: you wanted to get the increased fps possibly granted by lowering the LOD level, but you don't want to suffer from any of its limitations. Basically, you told the sim to reduce the LOD levels, but you don't really want to reduce the LOD level.
Speaking of Shack95, I am curious, does the pictures he published here, revealed an other "glass problem" which I didn't remarked myself ?
I don't know exactly what do you mean with "glass problem". If you mean glass showing over fog, that's a known issue with the MSFS graphic engine ( and P3D too ) that affects each and every other scenery with glass surfaces in fog.
-
I don't expect nothing, I just wanted to tell you that to give to me all your technical explanations, a bit like a justification of what's happen here with your Basel addon is just normal, was UNACCEPTABLE to my customer eyes. Period.
From the start, since I asked to you what you would do for this problem, your answers are angry and not at all professional, like I committed a crime of lese majesty by asking that ! Next time, just appologize for the problem, thanks me to have taken the time to make a video to show you the problem and just say a correction is on the way. Personnaly, as a customer, I don't care about all these complicate LOD problems and so on, I just care about a scenery without defaults of this kind, possibly with all sort of simulator setups.
Now, because of this silly Microsoft validation system and their vaccation, I will have to wait until january to check your correction and this is not my fault !
Personnaly, I would prefer not to continue this discussion. So, if you don't mind, let say the incident is closed.
Thanks to have corrected and a bit in advance, happy New Year !
-
I don't expect nothing, I just wanted to tell you that to give to me all your technical explanations, a bit like a justification of what's happen here with your Basel addon is just normal, was UNACCEPTABLE to my customer eyes. Period.[/quote]
Fact you call it "unacceptable", assuming you are referring to the FIXED version, only indicates you don't want to understand the reasoning behind LOD.
I explained that, even AFTER THE FIX, it's just wrong to expect the scenery would not be affected by any quality settings sliders, the Object Level of Detail slider in this case.
In fact, it would be A BUG IF IT DIDN'T and users would have every right to complain if a scenery did that, because they would lose their ability to decided to lower visual quality to gain performances, which is the whole point of the sliders.
From the start, since I asked to you what you would do for this problem, your answers are angry and not at all professional, like I committed a crime of lese majesty by asking that ! Next time, just appologize for the problem, thanks me to have taken the time to make a video to show you the problem and just say a correction is on the way. Personnaly, as a customer, I don't care about all these complicate LOD problems and so on, I just care about a scenery without defaults of this kind, possibly with all sort of simulator setups.
You got it entirely backwards: we haven't just provided proper and accurate information about WHY this happens, AND WE CHANGED THE SCENERY, just a few days after it has been reported. That's the only fact there is.
Now, because of this silly Microsoft validation system and their vaccation, I will have to wait until january to check your correction and this is not my fault !
Sure it's not "your fault" for this, and obviously nobody ever said that.
You that said, instead, our approach to this problem is "unacceptable" and we should "apologize". For what, exactly ? For having made a fix just a few days after the problem was discussed ? For Microsoft taking some time to approve updates ? For Microsoft being on vacations ?
It's not as if we haven't clearly explained the pros and cons of buying a product directly from FSDT or from the MS Marketplace, because we obviously did, many times, for example here:
http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,24167.msg160563.html#msg160563
-
I have a problem at LFSB since the latest patch. When I‘m in external view all the glass textures disappear from certain angles (also when relatively close by). In the drone view this doesn‘t seem to happen, even from the same angle and distance. The same occurs in VR. Most of the times all the glass is gone and only from some angles it reappears. I haven‘t encountered this at LSZH (same settings, same flight). Is there anything I can do about it?
Same problem for me. When I zoom out slightly, parts of the buildings disappear. When I zoom in again the buildings are complete again.
Exactly the same problem in VR, 200m away and the terminal is without any detail and glass, same with the tower. No other scenery shows this kind of behaviour with ultra settings. Zurich is similar with the jetways. Tested many other sceneries, only on FS Dreamteam seeing this.
-
Exactly the same problem in VR, 200m away and the terminal is without any detail and glass, same with the tower. No other scenery shows this kind of behaviour with ultra settings. Zurich is similar with the jetways. Tested many other sceneries, only on FS Dreamteam seeing this.
You don't say if you have the latest version, which can only be obtained if you run the FSDT Live Updater, which you can only use if you bought on our site or on Simmarket, or if you use the previous version, because if you bought on the MS Marketplace which, as explained already in this thread, will be updated as soon the MS Marketplace team will reopen for submissions.
-
Thanks for updating the scenery. I can confirm that in VR the terminal details such as glass textures pop in about 200-400 meters away from the southern end of runway 33. I tried the latest version (just a moment ago) with objects level of detail set to 130. It‘s much better than it was initially but still not entirely perfect.
-
Thanks for updating the scenery. I can confirm that in VR the terminal details such as glass textures pop in about 200-400 meters away from southern end of runway 33.
Then I don't think you really have the latest version. You said you tried it a moment ago, but you haven't said if you downloaded it today, because today we had ANOTHER update, and I tried it in VR, and I can confirm that you can see the terminal details even if are parked on runway 33 start position, with Object Level of detail set to 100.
Of course, like anything related to LOD, that setting is not the only one that matters, even the resolution matters, so I guess it matters in VR too. I have a Reverb G2, and I have set rendering scale in the sim to 70, and the terminal still show up fine from the runway threshold.
-
Then I don't think you really have the latest version. You said you tried it a moment ago, but you haven't said if you downloaded it today, because today we had ANOTHER update, and I tried it in VR, and I can confirm that you can see the terminal details even if are parked on runway 33 start position, with Object Level of detail set to 100.
Of course, like anything related to LOD, that setting is not the only one that matters, even the resolution matters, so I guess it matters in VR too. I have a Reverb G2, and I have set rendering scale in the sim to 70, and the terminal still show up fine from the runway threshold.
I downloaded the update 20 minutes before I wrote my post, so I guess it was the latest version.
But I should have expressed myself more clearly, by "200-400 meters away" from the runway I meant 200-400m south of the threshold of runway 33 at about 100-200 feet, so further away than the start position you tired. I have a Reverb G2 as well, render scale was set to 60 in the sim and 100 in the OpenXR developer tools.
-
I have a Reverb G2 as well, render scale was set to 60 in the sim and 100 in the OpenXR developer tools.
Do you see any different with Render scale at 70 in the sim ?
-
Do you see any different with Render scale at 70 in the sim ?
With render scale 70 it looks similar. I can’t tell if it’s exactly the same. When approaching into rwy 33, the textures appear roughly 500 meters before the threshold. On the threshold of rwy 15 I can‘t see them. Only when I move some 300-500 meters towards the terminal do they appear.
-
Umberto,
May I come back to the gate F4A attribution on landing.
Unfortunately, there is a bug in FS2020 with the choice of a gate on arrival. No problem to chose a gate and if you fly straight forward your flight plan, it work. Simulation will give you the gate you chosen. But if you have saved this flight in a FLT file, just after the loading of the aircraft, in dark cockpit situation and then, later on, during a new session, you load this saved flight and fly it, it wont work !?!
Curiously, you can see on the map of the flight plan editor, that the gate you selected was saved (you can also see that in reading inside the .FLT file), but the simulation ignore this part of the FLT data and give always instead the famous F4A gate. No randomness at all here ! The simulation probably start to read some data list from your BGL and always choose F4A. Don't ask me why ! But maybe you know why and can perhaps remedy.
To be always parked on this F4A location, do not do justice to the beauty of this great scenery ! If we have to be always parked at the same location, because of poor simulation AI, lets almost be parked in the most beautiful part of the airport, on a position with a mobile gateway !
So, if you can fool this poor FS2020 AI to make it to chose, for example the gate 35, in the heart of the airport, this would be great. Maybe it is just a change in the order of the items of the gates data list ?
Of course, I can still choose the gate manually, but because of the bug I describe before, I cannot use FLT save file, having an arrival gate saved in it and I have to rebuild the whole flight plan manually each time I want a specific arrival gate, which might be quite boring, after some time.
Of course this is only a minor suggestion. If it's complicated to do, then we forget !
anyway, thanks to take this into consideration.
-
The airport is made correctly, with its gates properly assigned, with their proper radius and properties according to real life, and it would be wrong to add wrong data in the scenery, just to sidestep what is clearly a bug in the sim that can be corrected at any time, considering the simulator is under heavy development.
So, be sure you file this bug to MS support using Zendesk, and if enough of you will do the same, you'll increase the chances for the bug to be fixed.
-
The airport is made correctly, with its gates properly assigned, with their proper radius and properties according to real life, and it would be wrong to add wrong data in the scenery, just to sidestep what is clearly a bug in the sim that can be corrected at any time, considering the simulator is under heavy development.
So, be sure you file this bug to MS support using Zendesk, and if enough of you will do the same, you'll increase the chances for the bug to be fixed.
I have absolutely no doubt that your scenery is made correctly and I did not criticize the product in my message.
You think it is wrong to be flexible and improve something, even at the cost of doing something that is not fully academic and maybe even temporarily. OK, fine I note it.
Now, speaking of the FS bug I found, I don't need you to tell me what to do.
Have a nice day.
-
First of all, thanks for your work on this scenery. I really like it as it captures the Airport very well.
When i was flying some touch and go's i was missing Basel Radar. Do you have any plans to add this building to the scenery?
It is a important navigation point of the airport and it is VFR Navpoint "WB" too.
47.59095571669884, 7.495203646607428
Shaolan
-
First of all, thanks for your work on this scenery. I really like it as it captures the Airport very well.
When i was flying some touch and go's i was missing Basel Radar. Do you have any plans to add this building to the scenery?
It is a important navigation point of the airport and it is VFR Navpoint "WB" too.
47.59095571669884, 7.495203646607428
Shaolan
That would be a nice addition indeed!
-
First of all, thanks for your work on this scenery. I really like it as it captures the Airport very well.
When i was flying some touch and go's i was missing Basel Radar. Do you have any plans to add this building to the scenery?
It is a important navigation point of the airport and it is VFR Navpoint "WB" too.
47.59095571669884, 7.495203646607428
Shaolan
That would be a nice addition indeed!
Dear FSDreamteam,
Do you confirm there is any plan to add this radar to the scenery, or was the request denied?
As explained, it materializes the WB reporting point for departure and arrival aircraft from the west, thus an important navigation feature.
Thank you in advance for feedback
Cheers
Antoine
-
When i was flying some touch and go's i was missing Basel Radar. Do you have any plans to add this building to the scenery?
We haven't denied anything. We read all posts and take note, but there's no way to tell exactly when a specific feature might appear, because it mostly depends on other tasks assigned to the various scenery authors.