F
More sad news for FS9...
- Thread starter Felixthreeone
- Start date
Cazzie
SOH-CM-2024
A good statement there CF....
They have to pay just to have that 20 minute sleep
It is hard, their mind is like a big machine that if you turn if off, it is still working.... and working... and working, there is no off button....
even in their sleep, their mind is still at work, imagine that!
I wonder if they are thinking how to spend their money?
LOLOLOLOL.....
LMAO....
I almost fell off my chair laughing so hard.. Oh man.. Thanks for that.
Yes, I am a FS9 guy. :d
As I stated in another thread (the Epic Victory thread in the FSX room), I have had to make the decision to go to FSX only on the Victory because I needed parts to be super detailed, I need a TON of parts and I hit my limit already (early in the game) twice, several weeks ago. I have been stalled in depression up until Christmas where, during prayer, asking God for a way to fix this, it occurred to me (that calm answer that comes to you like a gentle wind) that for now, I could make (continue) the Epic Victory in FSX only format.
You see, I (me) wants to make FS9 planes. They are easier to make. They never have bugs or issues, never crash computers (rarely in FS9), and run good. They are great! I release them and usually only get back great feedback from FS9 people. But FSX is filled with 'my plane is black, my plane crashes my computer, my this happens, my that happens, it turns pink, it turns into a pile of parts like it went through a black hole'......
So you see, I would love to do only FS9 planes..
But, I need details, small parts, close vertices, and TONS and TONS of parts, which means I need a compiler that can make a FS9 plane with no limitations on polygons, and no limitations on vertice proximity distances.
EDIT: ADDED; In my studies on my own on the FS9 compiler, I found out that the 'antiquated' compiler uses MASM code, which was designed around Pentium 386 and 486 chips. The compiler dumps the entire model into the RAM memory pool for compiling, doing this all at once. (What it could do, is do the interior, then exterior, but the actual MDL compiler, MakeMDL.exe, does the entire model in one go.. The X files and ASM files are done in sets, not both at once). In the old days, if your 386 computer maxed out its memory on such a compiler, you crashed your computer. So they installed limitations on the compiler to keep people from crashing their computers. But today, when people have dual cores and quad cores and this is almost common now to have chips 10X faster then what they were back in the early FS2004 days, you can now run such a unlimited compiler with great ease.
Note; the CFS 3 compiler has 'no' limitations on polygons, and no proximity limitations either, and the 'field' of compiling is quite similar. You could almost say its almost the same, but the CFS platform uses different tag names and they utilise LOD's more then FS9/FSX.
Now, since I leaked this 'secret' in the other thread, here is the deal. I am secretly working with a huge, great programing guru on a new compiler for FS2004 which would have the limitations taken out. This would mean, I could make the Victory for FS9 as well. But this program isnt done yet. This is a pretty sophisticated process or thing to do. So far, its so complex that we are trying to do it by a secondary bypass. So far, no joy. But I am faithful.. I have been praying to God for this thing to happen for many years now. Lets see if this gentleman can do it. (Pray for him).
So just remember, you guys that are FS2004 only people, that I am on your side.
:ernae:
Bill
yea and if u are running FSX with just SP1 all those neat FS9 a/c will work in FSX too, so best of both worlds
Fnerg
SOH-CM-2023
I would just like to add, try it. Learn how to do Gmax, it's not really that difficult. A year ago I knew nothing about modeling a plane. Now I think I know maybe 1/8 of what Bill or Milton knows, and it's enough to keep me excitedly coming back to the program.
If you are a dedicated FS9'er concerned about developers leaving for FSX? Then try to become an FS9 developer. Eventually, these Gmax methods will become basics for future developing...me thinks. Plus it's fun. And when you see your polygons flying around your computer screen, it's the best. Not to mention the encouragement you get from the developers themselves, and the community. Can't beat it. My 2 cents.
If you are a dedicated FS9'er concerned about developers leaving for FSX? Then try to become an FS9 developer. Eventually, these Gmax methods will become basics for future developing...me thinks. Plus it's fun. And when you see your polygons flying around your computer screen, it's the best. Not to mention the encouragement you get from the developers themselves, and the community. Can't beat it. My 2 cents.
Bill
I fully understand your decision...and having read your other thread on this decision, I know it was not an easy one to make. I fully understand your desire to be able to produce superbly detailed models, and that the FS9 compiler prevents that. And I fully understand that FSX packages are out selling FS9 packages...and since these models are your livelihood, go where the money is. I own two of your packages.....one (the Epic LT) was purchased for me by another forum member and one (the JU-33..something like that) I bought when it was on sale. At some point I really need to pony up the money for your Belanca Air Cruiser (I think that's right).
Fnerg,
I could not agree with you more. Those who fear the loss of all FS9 developers need to grab Gmax, follow Gmax tutorial lessons a few times to familiarize themselves with the tools, then follow Milton Shupe's tutes and learn to model aircraft. I have started and stopped several times in my attempt to learn to use Gmax.....and I will try again at some point. Right now, my heart just isn't into it.
OBIO
I fully understand your decision...and having read your other thread on this decision, I know it was not an easy one to make. I fully understand your desire to be able to produce superbly detailed models, and that the FS9 compiler prevents that. And I fully understand that FSX packages are out selling FS9 packages...and since these models are your livelihood, go where the money is. I own two of your packages.....one (the Epic LT) was purchased for me by another forum member and one (the JU-33..something like that) I bought when it was on sale. At some point I really need to pony up the money for your Belanca Air Cruiser (I think that's right).
Fnerg,
I could not agree with you more. Those who fear the loss of all FS9 developers need to grab Gmax, follow Gmax tutorial lessons a few times to familiarize themselves with the tools, then follow Milton Shupe's tutes and learn to model aircraft. I have started and stopped several times in my attempt to learn to use Gmax.....and I will try again at some point. Right now, my heart just isn't into it.
OBIO
Henry
Retired SOH Administrator
i tried but now the pics of the babes have got me reinterested
sadly life goes on
if anyone here remembers Graham a great dev for cfs2
VB planes, as the years go by the technical things change
and standards change i have been around since fs5
it took 2 years for me to get a pc to run cfs3
i still cannot run fsx correctly
it runs but not like fs9
im an old fart and just cannot keep up
but i try
one just cannot bury there head in the sand
and hope everything will be the same when we pull it out
thats just life
H
Wing_Z
Charter Member 2011
Well I for one am perfectly happy to sit here in FS9-land and wait while Lionheart & Co. figure out a better compiler.
Plenty to do in the meantime...
I can just see me having to back off the sliders a notch because of all those polys and detail - in FS9! :d
Bring it on, Bill. :ernae:
PS
I think new users get FSX (is FS9 still for sale?) and not seeing a great freeware selection, go out and get the payware.
The freeware downloads are still overwhelmingly FS9, and probably will remain so, because of the complexity of FSX.
So existing users that went to FSX (and seem to hate FS9 portovers), also go for the payware.
This skews the apparent user base.
A recent AVSIM poll asked "What is your preferred flightsim?" and the majority - unsurprisingly - went with FS9.
The SOH poll also shows this (Probably time for a new one though)
As to the apparently greater activity on FSX vs FS9 forums - well, in FS9 we are loong ago done with "Can I adjust my wiggle button without crashing the sim..."
Bring it on, Bill. :ernae:
Plenty to do in the meantime...
I can just see me having to back off the sliders a notch because of all those polys and detail - in FS9! :d
Bring it on, Bill. :ernae:
PS
I think new users get FSX (is FS9 still for sale?) and not seeing a great freeware selection, go out and get the payware.
The freeware downloads are still overwhelmingly FS9, and probably will remain so, because of the complexity of FSX.
So existing users that went to FSX (and seem to hate FS9 portovers), also go for the payware.
This skews the apparent user base.
A recent AVSIM poll asked "What is your preferred flightsim?" and the majority - unsurprisingly - went with FS9.
The SOH poll also shows this (Probably time for a new one though)
As to the apparently greater activity on FSX vs FS9 forums - well, in FS9 we are loong ago done with "Can I adjust my wiggle button without crashing the sim..."
Bring it on, Bill. :ernae:
srgalahad
Charter Member 2022
yea and if u are running FSX with just SP1 all those neat FS9 a/c will work in FSX too, so best of both worlds
Yep and another install of FSX SP1 +SP2...
and another one with SP1 + SP2 + Acceleration.
No sweat... then you can run anything... just a few moments every time you want to change.
I have nothing against FSX, other than it's need for "more". It's installed on one machine and probably will be on this one, but until recently there haven't been enough reasons to go and use it.
There will still be FS9 planes coming out.. maybe not as many as often, but then most of the truly marketable ones have been done (or overdone).. so many of the others that we dream of would actually be pretty 'small market' items when it comes to sales and potential sales vs workload IS part of a payware developer's business plan.
Rob
M
MCDesigns
Guest
Just a thought Bill, but comments like this might not be beneficial in building any FSX customer base since it's obvious your heart isn't into their sim of choice.
Best of luck with the new compiler.
Felixthreeone
Charter Member
With all due respect, Michael, there is nothing wrong with having FS9 as your personal favorite...after all....some people still consider fs2002 their personal favorite, and FSX wouldn't exist without fs9 and so on...so for a developer who is as well respected as Bill Ortis to say that he has a soft spot for fs9 isn't in any way telling me that FSX folks will be getting less than 100% from him; He is one of the best fs developers out there today, and a great person to boot. That is the reason I started this thread; That is the reason for my disappointment. Too many developers out there whose hearts AREN'T in it...regardless of the sim they use...and when certian developers produce an addon, you know you are getting something special...something that required heart, soul, and dedication. I envy the FSX crowd that will be able to fire up the Epic VLJ when it is relesed. And i will peruse the FSX forum looking for screenshots and ooohs and aaaahs and how awesome it is....because everything that Bill does is excellent. Sorry I went off ranting again.....
Yeah, I probably shouldnt talk like that. I was nice though. :d
Thanks gang for the kind words.. Just a humble poly bender is all.
Bill