We been cast aside again...

Here's my question...

If its so hard to back engineer to FS9 from FSX, then why not make a top notch FS9 aircraft and forward engineer it. Look at the new F-86, what will it have in FSX that it does not have in FS9? My guess would be rivets, but who cares. I've seen some really bad rivet jobs lately and if they were to life the drag would be a killer to any real plane.

My money would be on someone who develops for kick ass plane for FS9 and then makes it flyable in FSX. They to me are the true simm sales people. Unless someone can sell me on self shadows which I haven't been sold on yet.
 
Panther_99FS said:
Well I'm finally at some type of equilibrium....

I've finally realized that these type of threads are kinda like cockroaches - they'll never totally disappear...:mixedsmi:
Click to expand...


LOLOL.....! :costumes:


You are the one that usually starts them Panther! lolol....

:173go1:


Bill
 
skyhawka4m said:
Here's my question...

If its so hard to back engineer to FS9 from FSX, then why not make a top notch FS9 aircraft and forward engineer it. Look at the new F-86, what will it have in FSX that it does not have in FS9? My guess would be rivets, but who cares. I've seen some really bad rivet jobs lately and if they were to life the drag would be a killer to any real plane.

My money would be on someone who develops for kick ass plane for FS9 and then makes it flyable in FSX. They to me are the true simm sales people. Unless someone can sell me on self shadows which I haven't been sold on yet.
Click to expand...
Amen, skyhawk. Amen.
 
skyhawka4m said:
Here's my question...

If its so hard to back engineer to FS9 from FSX, then why not make a top notch FS9 aircraft and forward engineer it. Look at the new F-86, what will it have in FSX that it does not have in FS9?
Click to expand...

ok i'll bite :mixedsmi:

1 - 99% of the animations will have to be redone with some being added since FSX doesnt do pivot animations (for lack of a better term) like FS9.

So if you had an airilon that worked fine in fs9, to get it to work in fsx you'd need to animate it at the down - centerd - up positions, then tag it with the animation manager.

2 - all the textures in the 3d program need to be changed and tweeked

for fs9 you could just leave all the materials as "standard" whilst fsx has its own material type, which alows you tweak just about every aspect of it.

3 - all custom xml that was made for the plane would have to be redone so as to work in fsx

so say the following code worked fine in fs9:

Code: 
<part>   
     <name>switch_wingfold</name>   
     <animation>  
             <parameter>   
                     <sim>  
                             <variable>FOLDING WING LEFT PERCENT</variable>  
                             <units>Percent</units> 
                       <scale>25</scale> 
                     </sim> 
           </parameter>   
     </animation>  
     <mouserect>   
                 <cursor>Hand</cursor>   
                 <tooltip_text>Toggle Wingfold</tooltip_text> 
           <event_id>TOGGLE_WING_FOLD</event_id> 
     </mouserect>   
</part>

to get it to work in FSX it'd need to be changed to the following:

Code: 
<PartInfo>
    <Name>lever_toggle_wing_fold</Name>
    <AnimLength>100</AnimLength>
    <Animation>
      <Parameter>
        <Code>
          (A:FOLDING WING LEFT PERCENT, percent)
        </Code>
        <Lag>400</Lag>
      </Parameter>
    </Animation>
    <MouseRect>
      <Cursor>Hand</Cursor>
      <MouseFlags>LeftSingle</MouseFlags>
      <TooltipID>TOOLTIPTEXT_FOLDING_WING_HANDLE</TooltipID>
      <CallbackCode>
        (>K:TOGGLE_WING_FOLD)
      </CallbackCode>
    </MouseRect>
  </PartInfo>

now, doenst take long with just one if your used to it, but when you've got 100+ custom bits of code it takes a while :isadizzy:

4 - new textures would have to be done, bump, spec etc

Any repainter will know how long that can take :)

Now to another bit that bites if your doing payware, the money side, a good model can cost $3000 plus (i've personaly been quoted $4500 for one), then you have whatever the gauge guy charges, then you have whatever the painter charges, then you have what the airfile guy charges, so it does soon add up.

So if you've just paid all of the for a top notch fs9 model, then wanted to convert it to FSX, what would that cost?? well i charge $400+ to do a conversion and anything i cant do i pass to someone else who would charge their own amount, then you'd prolly have to get a new gauges for some things which would cost as well, the painter would probabley want some more to do all the spec and bump maps as well. So thats a possible $4000 plus for both, thats a cost that most payware people just aint willing to pay, and can you blame them??

Also, if your going for a next gen type plane, with tons of detail etc, then even the best FS9 plane couldnt even get close to what your after, it just isnt possible.

I'm sure Bill will back me up on this, building for 2 sims that are so different is a major pain and most developers dont want that hassle so just build for one, weather it be FS9 or FSX. Bill is crazy and builds for both, and look what its turned him into!! :costumes::ernae:

I'm sure i've said things which i'll get slaped for later but hopefull it'll help answer questions as to why people only build for one :wavey:
 
Well put Stiz...

But you didnt really 'stress' the actual 'magnification' of all that is involved.

** Animations: Where once we have gauge code that made a animation work, in FSX, there is a secondary 'string' header that goes in the top file, stating the aniation run length (if there is one) its type (visibility, animation only, effect such as a light, etc).

Second, concerning this subject. They changed the 'verbage' on the code. I can only think that it was done to keep new gauges from working in FS9. (Taking a new plane and putting it in FS9). Simple adjustments, such as changing names of Nouns and verbs and making capitals necessary creates a new code that must be re-written over an older FS9 code. This means, if you have 25 former animations, 25 dual input new code writings will be required. (Remember, each animation/effect code has 2 sections).

** Materials: Stiz talked lightly on FSX Materials. In FS9, you had a simple Material page. With FSX, you have like 5 types of graphics (DDS files) inputs, with critical 'tuned' Alpha channels, which will tell weather a material is transparent enough, even though you select a Opacity slider. Along with 5+ plus (yes, can be more) types of graphics, you also have 4 to 5 pages of Material data to punch in... 4 to 5..... (ticks, sliders, entries, etc).

** New mesh means you can go crazy, which allows a person to go through and turn a 'tire' for instance from a 400 poly object, to go through Mesh Smooth / 1 Iteration, and now its 2,000 polygons. Do that on about 50% of the parts, such as gauge bazel rings. That can take a few days.

** Mild airfile and config handling tunes... The plane handles somewhat slightly different, so slight tunes are required for those who really want a 'precise' handling plane.

** New Mapping: FSX brings in a new way of handling graphics. Less is faster. Thus people (like Stiz) have been on to remapping 4 graphics pages (sheets, bitmaps, DDS textures) into one larger 2048 pixels square sheet. Doing this several times lowers the 'draw calls' and enhances the aircrafts efficiency in FSX. But....... now each and every part (2,000?) must be remapped to those new 'super sheets'.

(Stiz is a revolutionist in this field and has now done this to many payware planes that were converted over, enabling them to run far faster then just a simple conversion to FSX from FS9. Salute! :applause: ).

That is 'some' of the things that must be done to birds that undergo a dual reality (twin sim) platform. I am surely leaving out some bits, but its 3:AM, so I am allowed to forget this late at night. :d

New codes for gauges, animations, effects. New texture handling. Man hours....


To quote Paul Harvey... 'And now you know.............. the rest... of the story. ' :d


Bill
 
Lionheart said:
(Stiz is a revolutionist in this field and has now done this to many payware planes that were converted over, enabling them to run far faster then just a simple conversion to FSX from FS9. Salute! :applause: ).
Click to expand...

i havnt done that many :costumes:
 
huzahhhhhh
charge.gif
:costumes:
 
LOL....


He is 'revo-luting'! :d


Takes a ton of patience to completely remap an entire plane, then redo all animations, and create all new hand made code for them.


Oh.. I did forget something. On FSX Animations, you have to 'animate' them through steps. In FS9, a ton of animations are based on 'Gizmo' axis centers, (object centers), such as ailerons, props, rudder, tires, control sticks and yokes, etc. In FSX, you must animate EVERYTHING!...


:icon_eek:
 
Speaking of FSX

It's a hog. One of the planes we fly at http://www.EagleValleyAir.com is the Dash 7 ( my favorite plane) in both FS9 and FSX. We are operating with the Virtual Airlines financial systems and we pay for the fuel. Well the Dash 7 in FS9 is running a consistent 18 pounds per minute. FSX it's up to 28 to 30 pounds per minute.
Can someone tell me where, in the Aircraft.cfg files I would look for the fuel scaler or what ever the correct name is for fuel use.

Regards
 
Does the 4th from the top have short gear, or was that landing "Panther'd" as I have heard so often? :costumes:
 
Let's see aircraft is down, there is smoke and flames...

Yep, I'd call it a Panther. :d
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top