FSDreamTeam forum
November 14, 2019, 02:25:29 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
  Print  
Author Topic: "Acropolis"-effect at KLAS  (Read 41622 times)
B777ER
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 329


« Reply #30 on: April 19, 2009, 09:02:33 PM »

Guy by the name of Michiel Mak is working on a file that will fix this problem while still keeping all your mesh files active. He is the same one who fixed that KMSP area after Blueprint released their MSP scenery. He will upload it to Avsim when completed...the same site he uploaded the MSP fix to.
Logged

Eric
swiss1
Newbie
*
Posts: 28


« Reply #31 on: April 22, 2009, 02:19:40 PM »

I have FS Global 2005 and  FSDT Las Vegas (Klas bled fix included.
First I got the dramatic "Acropolis effect with hang over and floating textures at some cornersl like the pictures in this topic.
The Mr, Shige's Vegas sceney was also affeced with a floating road.
The mesh issue at Las Vegas is well kown in FS2004!
What I did:
In the FS Global 2005\Name folder I desactivate (renaming.off) the 2 fles:
L5N1264.bgl
L9N1265.bgl
that's it. and see the pictures
I have now a perfectly integrated FSDT LasVegas with no acropolis neither floating textures
and I am happy.
The small double marking effect at runway 25R is still remaining.
Of course I lost 0.65% of my US mesh but visually it doesn't disturb Las Vegas and all the surrounding area but
this compromise solution is worth for such a scenery!

Just an other remark: Sometime I don't understand answers from Virtualy like:
FSDT sceneries are made for FSX, which is much better than FS9 and you have to accept some issue.
I agree that FSX is probably a better platform for quality sceneries but I am asking myself why it is sold for FS9?
A lot of sceneries works pretty well in FS9 and actually there are more people complaining about FSX than FS9.

I prefer the philosophie "Yes we can" and Las Vegas is also fantastic for FS9!



* fsscr000.JPG (112.48 KB, 1008x630 - viewed 856 times.)

* fsscr001.JPG (115.2 KB, 924x578 - viewed 784 times.)

* fsscr003.JPG (89.12 KB, 941x588 - viewed 1070 times.)

* fsscr004.JPG (133.69 KB, 874x546 - viewed 809 times.)

* fsscr05.JPG (97.05 KB, 958x599 - viewed 739 times.)
Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 36628



WWW
« Reply #32 on: April 22, 2009, 02:54:47 PM »

Just an other remark: Sometime I don't understand answers from Virtualy like: FSDT sceneries are made for FSX, which is much better than FS9 and you have to accept some issue.

With regard to the mesh problem, FSX allows a developer to create a very small local mesh than can be used to fix such problem. On FS9, it was much more complex, because one had to create a whole LOD quadrant, and start "resolution war" with any other meshes around.


Quote
I agree that FSX is probably a better platform for quality sceneries but I am asking myself why it is sold for FS9?

Because we found a method to convert the FSX scenery into FS9 so quickly, that it doens't make sense not to do it, as long there are people buying it. But we were always been open telling that the FSX version is the best one.

Quote
A lot of sceneries works pretty well in FS9 and actually there are more people complaining about FSX than FS9.

No, you shouldn't make the usualy mistake of assuming that that people that posts on forum statistically represent the reality. People that post on forum for complaint are ONLY users that have problems, and it's easier to have problems in FSX, not because FSX is worse than FS9, but because it's crippled by addon products that weren't specifically designed for it, and were instead ported from FS9, and this is a big no-no.

I've seen countless how "tutorials" aimed at developers, written by "respected" people that many developers usually trust for guidance, that suggest techniques, especially for gauges, which don't make ANY SENSE. They didn't make much sense in FS9 already, and are entirely wrong and possibly dangerous in FSX.

Whenever I get a look at ANY source code sample for gauges, the code is written so bad, that it's a miracle it would even *works*, let alone works fast. 95% of the developers in the flight sim industry are amateurs who learned C/C++ *because* they were forced to use it to develop gauges, and they are now happily downgrading to the XML "language", because C/C++ was just too much for them.

They don't have any idea of how to optimize for real-time simulation, they never run their stuff through a profiler and, even if they did, they wouldn't had any clue how to fix the problems in any case, so they just put the blame on FSX, because they aren't able to program an airplane that doesn't suck half of the fps all alone, so they force users to run it on a sim designed for 6-years old hardware, so it doesn't entirely get crippled on today's fast machines, and those poor users think the airplane has the right to be slow, because it has a complex simulation...

Here's a performance charts that shows exactly what I'm talking about:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3395/3251820427_5e46b7e173_o.jpg

Higher bars means better fps. I assume everybody here knows who programmed the Microsoft F/A-18...


There are commercial AI packages that still includes models from FS2002!! Because the publishers don't want to invest in rebuilding the whole AI set with FSX standards and proper LOD, which is too time consuming, hoping users would not mind, because it's easy to put (again) the blame on FSX begin "slow", and "everybody" knows it...



End of rant

Sorry guys, but it was too much time I had to vent this...I promise this is the last time.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2009, 02:58:43 PM by virtuali » Logged

Mike...
Full Member
***
Posts: 108


« Reply #33 on: April 22, 2009, 03:15:17 PM »

The "Acropolis" problem does not need to be fixed with mesh. This same problem can be found around KMSP as well (for example). With the help from SBuilder I created several LMW flatten polygons. Some flat, some sloped. That effectively did away with the huge plateau. As mentioned above, I'm already working on something similar for KLAS. The first results are promising. The plateau is gone on approach to the 25's and 19's. I just need to tweak the area north of Terminal D and the Cargo section.

But I want to see the other problem fixed first, before I complete the files and upload them.
Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 36628



WWW
« Reply #34 on: April 22, 2009, 03:32:37 PM »

The "Acropolis" problem does not need to be fixed with mesh.

But in FSX we *did* fixed with a small local mesh, that is included with the FSX.

Quote
This same problem can be found around KMSP as well (for example). With the help from SBuilder I created several LMW flatten polygons. Some flat, some sloped. That effectively did away with the huge plateau. As mentioned above, I'm already working on something similar for KLAS. The first results are promising.

Yes, that might be a way to fix the most obvious issues, but a custom local mesh is the best approach, because allows a finer control on the single elevations, that can be precisely edited as "pixel" (a mesh starts its life as as kind of bitmap), or smoothed out with tools like a blurred brush or something like that.

And, as I've said, doing this on FS9 would force to supply a whole quadrant, while on FSX the file can be as small as necessary, with any arbitrary shape.
Logged

Mike...
Full Member
***
Posts: 108


« Reply #35 on: April 22, 2009, 04:17:33 PM »

Stop pushing FSX already. We get it! Roll Eyes

Just be happy that someone will provide some files that'll get rid of the eyesore.

"But I want to see the other problem fixed first, before I complete the files and upload them."

By the way, that wasn't meant as any kind of leverage. I just think the bleeding problem may have something to do with flattens (and elevations) as well and I don't want there to be any conflicts between various files.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2009, 04:36:16 PM by Mike... » Logged
Chevy
Newbie
*
Posts: 6


« Reply #36 on: April 22, 2009, 09:43:52 PM »

With regard to the mesh problem, FSX allows a developer to create a very small local mesh than can be used to fix such problem.

But why is it then that there is still a mesh issue in FSX with KLAS? You are right that there is no plateau effect like in FS2004 but as is described in the parallel thread (http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=1747.msg13849#new) there are areas sunk in and trenches to be seen...

Christian
Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 36628



WWW
« Reply #37 on: April 22, 2009, 10:07:37 PM »

But why is it then that there is still a mesh issue in FSX with KLAS? You are right that there is no plateau effect like in FS2004 but as is described in the parallel thread

I don't pretend our local FSX mesh is be able to solve *every* problem. With some 3rd party meshes there might be still issues. However, that the issues are much less and appear far less often than in FS9, it's a given.
Logged

Nightowl
Newbie
*
Posts: 10


« Reply #38 on: April 22, 2009, 10:29:10 PM »

I think KLAS is fine for FS9 as it comes to details. There are some issues with mesh files, but for me it is not a reason to make the step to FSX. FSX is for developers far better I understand from many posts on many developer forums. For the end user FSX is a far more "heavy resource user" so many of us are not willing (or are not able) to invest in new hardware, needed to have FSX running like FS9 already does for many years.
Another issue why people stay with FS9 and not making the switch to FSX, is the large ammount of money spent to addons for FS9. To have FSX looking as good as FS9 does, with addons, a lot of money has to be spent again. So when I would have running FSX just as good as FS9, and even more imported, with that many addons, a lot of money is needed. I do recognize the potential FSX has over FS9, but the money is keeping me from the final step to FSX. I do have both platforms installed, but I fly mainly FS9.

I am very happy both platforms are being supported by many addon developers (first time in history an "old" version is being supported for such a long time, FSX is among us for over 2 years now), with or without additional charges for the FSX version.

KLAS is doing very well for me in FS9, and I am very happy with the version.


Just my two cents,
Logged

Mike...
Full Member
***
Posts: 108


« Reply #39 on: April 23, 2009, 01:16:36 AM »

Okay, before I go to bed (1:12AM at the moment, ah, the things I do for FS), I thought I'd share my first attempt. I have a full complement of FSGenesis mesh and I use TERRAIN_MAX_VERTEX_LEVEL=21.

Download the zip and unzip the files to KLAS' scenery folder. Give feedback! Especially if you use other mesh.

This is not a perfect solution, but it is a lot better than the eyesores and disabling mesh.

* acropolis.zip (1.01 KB - downloaded 1025 times.)
« Last Edit: April 23, 2009, 01:18:12 AM by Mike... » Logged
AaronMyers
Full Member
***
Posts: 137


« Reply #40 on: April 23, 2009, 04:10:34 AM »

Using FS Global 08 and FS Genesis for the States, vertex level set at 20 and your files are a huge improvement. I'll check some more later, but it looks good so far.
Logged
B777ER
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 329


« Reply #41 on: April 23, 2009, 06:29:59 AM »

Mike, very late here on the US east coast. Will check them in the morning. Thanks!!!!
Logged

Eric
graemeb
Newbie
*
Posts: 11


« Reply #42 on: April 23, 2009, 02:04:07 PM »

Mike,
I have FSGenesis mesh (all flavours) for USA and your fix makes a huge improvement to the look of KLAS. No more giant cliffs and overhanging scenery. Thank you very much!

Graeme
Logged

Graeme
B777ER
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 329


« Reply #43 on: April 23, 2009, 06:08:59 PM »

Mike, it works great with FSG mesh. The only issue I have outstanding is the same effect with the vegas2004 scenery that I have installed from Avsim.com.
Logged

Eric
Mike...
Full Member
***
Posts: 108


« Reply #44 on: April 23, 2009, 10:29:08 PM »

The Library is not working for me at the monent, do you have a filename?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!