I was wondering if there was any way to install the Shockwave Fw190's into FSX Acceleration without FS2004 installed on my hard drive. When I try to install the Fw190's, the installation process looks for FS2004 and when FS2004 is not found, the installation is cancelled. Any ideas?
-
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
Shockwave Aircraft
- Thread starter rewasiuk
- Start date
- Status
Alexraptor
Charter Member
Not a clue, but i think you would be disapointed.
Most non-FSX native shockwave planes do not work properly with Acceleration.
Most non-FSX native shockwave planes do not work properly with Acceleration.
Roger
Senior Administrator
The only 190 FsX native is payware but well worth it. Check it out here
http://www.classics-hangar.de/main_en.htm
http://www.classics-hangar.de/main_en.htm
The Shockwave FW190 is automatically installing in the default FS9 directory. You could try to create a FS9 directory on the default location and put a dummy FS9.exe file in it. I have never tried it, but I know people who told me it worked. (You might have to create a dummy fs9.cfg file as well.)
However when you have a few dollars to spend I advise you to go for the Classics Hangar FW190. In my FS2004 install I still have the Shockwave WOP FW190 installed. It looks terribly dated compared with the super accurate Classics Hangar one.
Success,
Huub
However when you have a few dollars to spend I advise you to go for the Classics Hangar FW190. In my FS2004 install I still have the Shockwave WOP FW190 installed. It looks terribly dated compared with the super accurate Classics Hangar one.
Success,
Huub
I for one think the A2A/Shockwave fw190 looks great in FSX even with acceleration installed (not dx10 though of course). Although itd be a port, I get pretty good frames in FSX with it. The VC is far from dated. If you do want to save up for a fw190, the upcoming A2A one looks fantastic especially the VC. Plus itd be accusimed!
It is common knowledge that you can't argue about taste. However I think is is a bit weird to have an opinion about something you haven't seen.
So far I haven't seen more from the announced A2A Focke-Wulf FW190 than some shots from a virtual cockpit which seems to belong to a Dora. But I haven't seen any screenshot from the external model so far. When you say "looks fantastic especially the VC" you are suggesting you have seen more. Therefore I would appriciate it, if you could direct me to some images which show the external model.
When you still like the look of the 4 year old WOP FW190, you should consider yourself lucky as you are obviously easier to satisfy than me.
Cheers,
Huub
So true Huub, so very true. I personally find the Realair Spitfire, to be nothing special in the FM department, it just doesn't match what I have read about the Spitfire's handling. I find the Realflight F6Fto be sub-par in all areas except 3D model and texturing (I don't even have it installed and consider it a waste of money). I spent a long time making a new paintkit for the Shockwave Fw190A and used it to create 2048x2048 replacement textures for the Shockwave Fw190A in FSX. I stopped about half way throught because it just looks so dated now. I love the CH Fw190A but IMHO the external texturing (and bump mapping) is just not that good.
I know a lot of people will find my these statements as sacrilege, but as you say "you can't argue about taste". Each to their own
jankees
SOH-CM-2025
I'd say that you can argue all you want about taste, as long as you agree to disagree in the end.
I like both 190's, one for FS9, one for FSX. I like the Hellcat too, even though there are a few things...
I like Mustangs, though I haven't touched the acceleration version, still use the WoP one in FSX occasionally, have given up on the warbirdsim one and think the new A2A one can't come fast enough, but I'll still have to wait and see if I like it.
I'm in happy anticipation of the new Catalina, and absolutely adore the P-47.
Now, how about a bubbletop (instead of the FW190, we've got a great one already)....?
Roger
Senior Administrator
I love the CH Fw190A but IMHO the external texturing (and bump mapping) is just not that good.
If the bump mapping doesn't seem that good then you musn't have this set up in your FsX.cfg.
TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=2048
In 2048 the bump mapping is second to none.
The bump mapping on my CH Fw190A is working fine... it just doesn't look that good IMHO. What I find wrong is the fact that every single line is recessed when some research on the real Fw190 panels show that quite a few of them overlap and have raised panels.
Incidentally the texture max load parameter does not effect any textures that do no include mipmaps so the Fw190A textures are not effected by this parameter.
Here are a few photos to show what I mean (I know one is of a P-40 but it shows how panels are often overlapping)
Incidentally the texture max load parameter does not effect any textures that do no include mipmaps so the Fw190A textures are not effected by this parameter.
Here are a few photos to show what I mean (I know one is of a P-40 but it shows how panels are often overlapping)
I agree It does look pretty good, and you are correct there is no better Fw190 in FSX. The aircraft itself is in my opinion a great addon, has a great 3D model and great FM. I just think that while it looks OK the textures/bumps/speculars don't do it it any real justice.
Alexraptor
Charter Member
What can i say? Some people just won't be satisfied until real planes get laserscanned at 1mm per pixel accuracy into the flightsim.
Don't be so melodramatic, at no stage did I whine about it not looking like a real Fw190, that is entirely your assumption. The facilities are already there in FSX to make textures and speculars look much better. Some extra work on the spec textures and the alpha channels can give some very realistic effects. The CH Fw190A does not take advantage of them as well as it could do. I just find the textures to look bland compared to what can be achieved. I am basing my opinion on what can already be achieved in FSX, not about it not looking perfectly like the real thing.
That's a pretty assholeish thing to say....
The Classic Hanger FW190's skins is not bad, and is actually pretty nice. But honestly, it's not that much better than the Shockwave one, even with the bumpmaping. Since the original poster was interested in the old Shockwave model, in MY OPINION, not yours Huub, it looks very nice in FSX.
I think the .exe trick mentioned earlier works for tricking the installer. If you do get the Shockwave working Fw190 I think the .exe trick mentioned earlier works for tricking the installer then I did release some 2048x2048 repaints for it. Look for ICDP downloads in the library.
Here is a sample of the newer 2048x2048 texture for the SW Fw190
Here is a sample of the newer 2048x2048 texture for the SW Fw190
- Status