|
aircanadajet
|
 |
« Reply #210 on: December 12, 2011, 04:01:38 AM » |
|
Thats great Umberto! Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ottoramsaig
Newbie
Posts: 34
Never Forgotten
|
|
« Reply #211 on: December 15, 2011, 04:40:22 PM » |
|
Hurry up releasing GSX. Don't keep Santa waiting! I have been a very good boy.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
normandean
Newbie
Posts: 16
|
|
« Reply #212 on: December 16, 2011, 12:08:09 AM » |
|
Thought of something else; is it possible to perhaps develop a menu where you get to choose where the jetways should attach to the plane? Because I noticed yesterday flew on a 767-300 ER and the jetway attached where there was not door, near the wing... most of the 767-300 ER's do have a second door, but this one didn't for some reason... I know 767 400 all have them. any ideas?
That is something that you adjust in the aircraft.cfg file. If you have two versions of the 767-300, one with two doors and one with one then you will need to make two folders for the different textures with a separate aircraft.cfg in each. Norman |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
aircanadajet
|
|
« Reply #213 on: December 19, 2011, 02:14:03 AM » |
|
Thought of something else; is it possible to perhaps develop a menu where you get to choose where the jetways should attach to the plane? Because I noticed yesterday flew on a 767-300 ER and the jetway attached where there was not door, near the wing... most of the 767-300 ER's do have a second door, but this one didn't for some reason... I know 767 400 all have them. any ideas?
That is something that you adjust in the aircraft.cfg file. If you have two versions of the 767-300, one with two doors and one with one then you will need to make two folders for the different textures with a separate aircraft.cfg in each. Norman Still Norman, the menu its a neat idea (me saying) I've notice that there are times when a 777 300 ER parks on a single jetway, the yet way is connected to the front and not the door closest to the wing... and vice versa, if its possible to have a way to tell FSX, I want front door rather than second door today, it would fantastic in my own little world. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
virtuali
|
|
« Reply #214 on: December 19, 2011, 10:04:33 AM » |
|
and vice versa, if its possible to have a way to tell FSX, I want front door rather than second door today, it would fantastic in my own little world It would be impratical to use, because it would require reloading the airplane in order for FSX to read the updated aircraft.cfg. Remember that GSX doesn't change *anything* in the jetway system. We could do something like this only if we had a replacement for the default jetway system which, as discussed already, would require having to support each 3rd party airport specifically, which means we would have to interact with developers and charge per-airport. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
theshack440
|
|
« Reply #215 on: December 19, 2011, 03:26:52 PM » |
|
We could do something like this only if we had a replacement for the default jetway system which, as discussed already, would require having to support each 3rd party airport specifically, which means we would have to interact with developers and charge per-airport.
Would you be interested in either making the double jetways at only FSDT airports be able to move (besides the exception of Gate 6 at T4 at JFK (A380 gate) which already does) if the airplane requesting it has several exit entries in the .cfg? Or maybe if you decide to replace the default jetway system, only do it for FSDT airports so you don't have interact with anyone different? Just some ideas because it seems pointless to have double jetways with only one "arm" of them working. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
virtuali
|
|
« Reply #216 on: December 19, 2011, 03:50:33 PM » |
|
We haven't decided anything about this, not even if we'll do it, right now we are just trying to get GSX out of the door. Of course, having to support only our airports would be much easier.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
theshack440
|
|
« Reply #217 on: December 20, 2011, 12:46:01 AM » |
|
Right. It was just a thought. Is it even possible to have a double jetway working without having to replace the default jetways themselves?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
aircanadajet
|
|
« Reply #218 on: December 20, 2011, 01:41:31 AM » |
|
and vice versa, if its possible to have a way to tell FSX, I want front door rather than second door today, it would fantastic in my own little world It would be impratical to use, because it would require reloading the airplane in order for FSX to read the updated aircraft.cfg. Remember that GSX doesn't change *anything* in the jetway system. We could do something like this only if we had a replacement for the default jetway system which, as discussed already, would require having to support each 3rd party airport specifically, which means we would have to interact with developers and charge per-airport. I hope you know that I would pay everything that comes out with the "Made in FSDT land"... and I am sure there are many, many more who would too. Its the matter of adding a little bit more of realism to FSX that makes it that much difference, and when someone does a good job, it feels good...aw.. Also you could do a pilot program with only your airports at first. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 20, 2011, 01:59:18 AM by aircanadajet »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ca177
Newbie
Posts: 17
|
|
« Reply #219 on: December 20, 2011, 03:16:30 AM » |
|
Is it already in beta or not?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Silverbird
|
|
« Reply #220 on: December 20, 2011, 04:52:20 AM » |
|
Is it already in beta or not?
It is it just takes time testing  http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=5079.0 Umberto/fsdt team are trying to release it before the end of the year. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Cesar Intel I5-2500K 3.3GHz @4.7 Gigabyte GA-P67A-UD3 B3 Corsair A-50 Kingston HyperX Blu 4GB DDR3 1600 Seagate 500 HD Antec truepower trio 550 PNY 460 GTX 1GIG Acer 23 LED WIN 7 64BIT FSX X accel
|
|
|
space_coast
Newbie
Posts: 15
|
|
« Reply #221 on: December 24, 2011, 08:15:29 AM » |
|
Any news how far the beta of GSX is?Any estimates when the release will be? Thanks and merry Christmas!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
virtuali
|
|
« Reply #222 on: December 24, 2011, 10:57:37 AM » |
|
It will released when it's ready, the beta is progressing fine.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JamesChams
|
|
« Reply #223 on: December 24, 2011, 10:53:16 PM » |
|
It will released when it's ready, the beta is progressing fine.
I believe that the question is intended to determine if you are still within your posted timeline of 2011 or has that been postponed now to sometime in 2012? Either way, I can wait...  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Walk with the wise and become wise; associate with fools and get in trouble.” (Prov.13:20 NIV)
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
From,
James F. Chams
|
|
|
|
virtuali
|
|
« Reply #224 on: December 25, 2011, 10:06:32 AM » |
|
I believe that the question is intended to determine if you are still within your posted timeline of 2011 Since I've haven't replied to that specific question, the only possible conclusion is that there's no answer to that question yet. And, in any case, it will be released as soon as it's ready, without any previous announcement, like any other product we released so far: we never announced an exact date for a product, only general timeframes. Fact that "in 2011" (which was posted in March) sounds like an "exact" date now, since 2011 is passing by, it's just unfortunate, but still the fact stands that it was a general idea of a release time-frame announced 9 months ago, which means we would consider it a success being able to release it a few days into the new year. Nobody in the gaming industry is ever able to match release dates with a 10-15 days margin, with 9 months in advance... I can only confirm the product is in active Beta testing here, which means it can't be too long before it's released. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
