• 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

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

What makes a "Portover" a portover?

When it comes to payware it had better have been developed from the ground up for FSX, not a FS9 model that has been adapted to work in FSX.
 
stansdds said:
When it comes to payware it had better have been developed from the ground up for FSX, not a FS9 model that has been adapted to work in FSX.
Click to expand...

Sometimes good FS9 aircraft recompiled to native FSX is a keeper. Take a look at A2A's solo warbird series. I have their Bf-109 and I love it. It is basically FS9 aircraft with few fixes and some detail added recompiled with FSX exporter. It doesn't even have normalmaps. Same thing with Curtiss Jenny I've converted from sources from FS9 SDK. It still looks good. I don't fly FS9 portovers because of the FPS hit, and props hidden behind clouds.

This thread remind me one thing. I'd love to see FSX native version of a certain Junkers and Bucker Bestmann :wavey:
 
From a strict point of view:

Portover - a model compiled with the FS2004 SDK tools and tweaked to work in FS-X

NAtive FS-X: a model compiled with the FS-X SDK tools

There really is no other definition (from a technical point of view)

If you open an MDL file with notepad:
an FS2004 SDK compiled model will have a header of: MDL8MDLH
an FS-X SDK compiled model will have a header of: MDLXMDL
 
I am with empeck, the main key here is the compiler. if it is compiled with the FSX compiler, it is FSX 'native" not compliant or any other term. It may be lacking in features suck as bump mapping etc, but it is still FSX native. Mesh is mesh and starts in the same place (Gmax, 3DS, blender, CD4, etc), it's the compiler you use that determines whether it's for FS9 or FSX.

Kiwikat said:
A portover is simply a model not compiled with the FSX compiler.

I do not think ANY aircraft should have FSX written ANYWHERE on it unless it is a NATIVE FSX model.

:wavey:
Click to expand...

I agree 100%!!!

There is nothing wrong with using FS9 aircraft in FSX, I do it myself, it's the fact that you constantly see aircraft uploaded to sites and payware developers NOT using the correct terminology so that the user can determine if the aircraft is indeed native or not, rather black and white IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top