VRS F/A-18E Superbug SP1 released
- Thread starter Varmint
- Start date
Hey Tom,
Paypal, Visa, MC, Amex, Discover. Currently no wampum or cockleshells, but we're working on it
Felixthreeone
Charter Member
Maybe I will re-install it and give it another try.....assuming SP1 fixes the more major issues that I encountered; I flew it about 5 or 6 times, then wrote it off....great product; great support; just didn't run right for me. If I see positive responses from SP1, I'm there!
You really need to go to the support forums. There are currently no issues that are unresolved, so there's no reason in the world why you should be having problems if you ask for help.
Generally these are related to setting up and diagnosing controller issues for the FBW system. SP1 has added additional GUID information to our config files to make these easier to diagnose.
Generally these are related to setting up and diagnosing controller issues for the FBW system. SP1 has added additional GUID information to our config files to make these easier to diagnose.
Felixthreeone
Charter Member
Well Jon I have posted on the forums; Tried all of the suggestions; Tweaked, tuned and tweaked some more...you and your team have been GREAT with the support. It just doesn't like my computer. It upsets me greatly, as your Superhornet was THE aircraft I was looking forward to more than any other. I get 10Fps. Period. No matter what I do. Nothing changes it. Lets just say that FBW and 10FPS don't agree with one another. Which tells me that my computer (a $2200 gaming laptop) isn't up to the challenge. I will live with it. One day soon I will have a better setup and will give it a go. Or just load it up and look at it on the ramp and drool.
Felix, I guess I can empathize with that (I wasn't sure what the problem was until just now), but, and this is just from my own experience with laptops, the words "gaming" and "laptop" when combined form an oxymoron
This plane (and FS) is heavily CPU dependent. While FS may run fine with non-intensive aircraft, particularly with steam gauges, we really need to do some intense computing, with lots of trig.
I myself have a Wolfdale 3.12 (stock) Dual core and get 39.9/40 out of FlightScenery's KPDX. But obviously you're mileage can and will vary. I've never seen a laptop with the cycles needed for this kind of thing. My dual core will beat any quad simply because of the clock on the primary core.
I will gladly refund you simply because I believe you, and I know you were really looking forward to it, and it seems (at least for now), your harware just isn't there. Send me off an email with your name and it's done.
Cheers,
--Jon
This plane (and FS) is heavily CPU dependent. While FS may run fine with non-intensive aircraft, particularly with steam gauges, we really need to do some intense computing, with lots of trig.
I myself have a Wolfdale 3.12 (stock) Dual core and get 39.9/40 out of FlightScenery's KPDX. But obviously you're mileage can and will vary. I've never seen a laptop with the cycles needed for this kind of thing. My dual core will beat any quad simply because of the clock on the primary core.
I will gladly refund you simply because I believe you, and I know you were really looking forward to it, and it seems (at least for now), your harware just isn't there. Send me off an email with your name and it's done.
Cheers,
--Jon
Felixthreeone
Charter Member
Well Jon, as I said, I am going to hang on to it. I very much appreciate your help....but I am not asking for a refund. I guess I was more or less curious as to whether or not any 'fps' increasing tweaks had been made. I generally have 35-40 fps at Flightzone Portland in the Eaglesoft SR-20 with activesky on and Traffic 2005/MAIW stuff going as well. Not exactly a fps 'easy' scenario....but the 'Bug is so advanced, it trumps all of those addons in complexity. I like it a lot, and will definitely be installing it on my new machine (as soon as I get it :woot
Wow, posting this I feel like a troll or a pirate or something (even though I did purchase the plane honestly)...
But I have to complain about FPS, too. I am slightly more lucky - with everything tweaked out, I get between 8-18 FPS, but the average is about 12, and the plane is simply unflyable. For such an expensive purchase, I would definitly welcome development of a special "lite" version... or else a refund as was mentioned above.
My handle here is the same as on the VRS forums, so if you want to check my facts (or ban me), you know where to look.
On the VRS forums, I posted about FPS - I even posted that I had found some performance on my machine - but that performance was then defined as an average of 15 FPS - I was having a good day and so was my machine - and unfortunately, those do not coincide often enough!
But I have to complain about FPS, too. I am slightly more lucky - with everything tweaked out, I get between 8-18 FPS, but the average is about 12, and the plane is simply unflyable. For such an expensive purchase, I would definitly welcome development of a special "lite" version... or else a refund as was mentioned above.
My handle here is the same as on the VRS forums, so if you want to check my facts (or ban me), you know where to look.
On the VRS forums, I posted about FPS - I even posted that I had found some performance on my machine - but that performance was then defined as an average of 15 FPS - I was having a good day and so was my machine - and unfortunately, those do not coincide often enough!
We make an extremely LARGE number of OPTIONS available to tailor the sim to virtually any configuration. Our frame rates correspond exactly those those listed under our systems requirements. We are open about it, and we've always been more than willing to help anyone with frame rate issues. "For such an expensive" ($44.95) addon, I think we do more than most products for any price. Find me a bigger market and I'll find you a lower price.
This is not a steam powered airplane. You pay for frames with functions, and whether you're willing to accept that or not, it's about as reliable a forumula as gravity. This airplane will run at 40FPS+ on any dual core approaching 3Ghz. It was developed on a P4 at 3Ghz and frames are consitstently 24 on that platform.
--Jon
CodyValkyrie
Charter Member 2016
Gentlemen, to be fair, how can you expect a simulation that covers roughly 90%+ of what a real F/A-18E Super Hornet does to run on antiquated hardware? I'm running a mediocre Core2Duo E6400 and am getting a silky smooth 40 FPS + with all graphics maxed. Expecting them also to make a light version is also not an option. If people want a "lite" version, I am sure there are plenty of freeware models out there that can fit the bill. If however you want to run a TOP OF THE LINE F/A-18 simulator, you need to do your part.
People pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to do what this aircraft simulates at a fraction of that cost. On top of that, many others spend hundreds per hour just to get an opportunity to play in something that simulates this closely.
I hope this doesn't come as cross to some of you. I just don't always understand what people want. Let's just be realistic with our developers. It is this type of mindset that keeps developers from further developing the software we all love.
My feeling about FPS and refunds... be thankful I don't run VRS. The product works as intended. If the FPS is low, that is not their fault. That is like purchasing a Rolls Royce car and constantly filling it with 87 octane fuel.
Again, my apology if I was sounding rather rude. I just don't see any other way for me to express what I feel is an unfair shake.
People pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to do what this aircraft simulates at a fraction of that cost. On top of that, many others spend hundreds per hour just to get an opportunity to play in something that simulates this closely.
I hope this doesn't come as cross to some of you. I just don't always understand what people want. Let's just be realistic with our developers. It is this type of mindset that keeps developers from further developing the software we all love.
My feeling about FPS and refunds... be thankful I don't run VRS. The product works as intended. If the FPS is low, that is not their fault. That is like purchasing a Rolls Royce car and constantly filling it with 87 octane fuel.
Again, my apology if I was sounding rather rude. I just don't see any other way for me to express what I feel is an unfair shake.
Sorry - I shouldn't have posted the way I did. I do understand your frustration. You must be very weary of hearing that sort of complaint. But please note that I am running at such FPS with none of the geometry options in the VC enabled, VC detail at 1/5, all the instruments on 'lite', radar refresh at the lowest setting, no loadouts, etc, etc. I have to take my sim AND graphics card settings all the way back to full-right sliders to get 24 FPS in this bird even with all the other settings I have mentioned applied. So I am a little but frustrated, too.
Please accept my humble apologies. I never intend to annoy others if I can help it.
Please accept my humble apologies. I never intend to annoy others if I can help it.
CodyValkyrie
Charter Member 2016
EMatheson, I can understand your frustration to an extent. My work requires me to make clients happy with my videos. Unfortunately, often times clients ask me to film software that I struggle in FSX to achieve even a modest framerate on my less than new machine. I'm not asking you to put yourself in my shoes, I'm just trying to level with you.
Hopefully, either after an upgrade or further tweaking you will get set. Asking for VRS to produce a miracle however...
Hopefully, either after an upgrade or further tweaking you will get set. Asking for VRS to produce a miracle however...
CodyValkyrie
Charter Member 2016
Looks like the PRs got out there. Well deserved Jon and team.