• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.

    Post 16 Update

    Post 17 Warning

FSX ... for the retro (GW3) period

delta_lima

delta_lima

Charter Member 2015
Hello all.

My prime (FS1955) FS9 install has just died. It was my pride and joy FS9, with all the Calclassic airports, on a GW3 framework tweaked with some tarmac, etc. So, I'm looking at a complete FS9 rebuilt, or making the jump to .... FSX?

So questions for the gang (Roger :) ) include thoughts on

1) to what degree can I have a GW3 type AUTOGEN environment? I think I know the answer :)( ), but just confirming
2) will my Calclassics airports/AFCADS work?
3) will my AArdvark/Calclassics AI planes work?

I'm sure this has been debated and discussed, but I searched here and found no threads, and the GW3 FSX thread seems to have gone cold over at the Old Hangar ...

Many thanks!

dl
 
GW3 really requires FS9 to work properly. Trying to use any part of it with FSX is likely to lead to frustration if not heartache. You might have some luck with it but aircraft all have problems, AFCADs are not always in the right spot, traffic can be a bear, textures don't always display, autogen is different. I wasted many hours on trying. You can certainly do the same and your standards may be low enough that it will be satisfactory. In my case, I found a GW3 backup and restored it. I have FS9 with GW3 for living in the past, and FSX for "modern" GA flying, Best of both worlds.

We used to have "Everything old is new again" for a motto. Now it shouyld be "GW3: A good reason to keep FS9 handy." :icon_lol:
 
Just thinking out loud here - shouldn't the question be "why can't we have a GW3 for FSX ?" ?

To put it another way, are there any reasons why all that was done to make GW3 for FS9 / FS2004 / ACOF could not be done for FSX, apart from the actual work involved of course (including the time, commitment and skills required) ?

I know that the comment above mentioned a thread about "GW3 and FSX" at The Old Hangar, but I don't have time right now to go and study that,
Ro
:ernae:
 
As for using any content from Gw3 it would slow the experience down to much because of the backward compatibility issue, i have looked into doing a Gw for Fsx my self and found that it would be possible with a few people who knew what they were doing, eg scenery files because most of the other stuff is quite easy . . .
 
I started editing all of the modern buildings out of the autogen files for the UK to try and make "FS1944" a while ago and, while it is indeed possible, it's getting the sizes of the towns and cities right that's the pig.

Given enough people and enough time, you could most certainly make something close enough for purpose, but you would need, just as an example using the UK, to:

- Go through the autogen files and remove all modern buildings.
- Go around the entire country removing all the motorways (freeways).
- Put individual excludes in place to remove all the modern "landmark" buildings from all towns and cities(*)
- work through every airfield and remove the modern ones, or put them back to their historical counterparts.

(* - or possibly just remove the models from the library, which would be quicker!)

It's possible, but a massive amount of work and effort involved. If a moderately large group of people got involved in doing comparatively small areas (e.g. part of the US or the whole UK), we might have got one area done by the time someone next releases a civilian FS and we have to start all over again with that. ;)

Ian P.
 
Im in ! Lol but seriously if enough talented people were involved this would be like Flanders Fields was to Cfs3 !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top