Xplane ain't got nothin... [Archive]

tigisfat

August 28th, 2009, 18:42

who-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-hoa!!!!

I about pissed my paints when I saw that screenshot!!:applause:
http://i595.photobucket.com/albums/tt32/walkeramerican/forum%20commentary%20pictures/seen.jpg

I've been thinking that for a while, about how clouds affect ambient lighting, how it's different from various angles around them and how clouds need shadows.

I have a feeling this alone will drive a serious computer upgrade for me, I think it'll be pretty serious on the impact.

Slug Flyer

August 28th, 2009, 18:52

Lo these many years after they did it in Falcon 4.0! Sweet!

Can't help but worry about the performance hit, though.

spotlope

August 28th, 2009, 20:25

As soon as I saw those pics (and picked up my jaw), I thought of a couple of ways they might have accomplished it. And of course, I'm probably completely wrong. Either way, I'm fascinated to see how this plays out.

Lionheart

August 28th, 2009, 21:17

Nice

FSX Catches up to one of XP9's effects. Awesome! :d

Cazzie

August 29th, 2009, 04:04

Super work, looks astounding. That REX bunch have my money.

Caz

Bjoern

August 29th, 2009, 10:06

This just screams "framearate drop"...

Nice to see though.

Tweek

August 29th, 2009, 10:22

If these are true cloud shadows, then I hope it affects the aircraft too, so that aircraft still aren't lit up with bright sunlight in overcast conditions.

Please say this is as good as it looks!

falcon409

August 29th, 2009, 10:24

Pretty impressive. . .I'd be more interested in finding out what ground texture addon he's using. The question was asked numerous times but he never answered.

bkeske

August 29th, 2009, 10:43

Yep, impressive. This would make me purchase, and start using REX over FEX.

Bjoern

August 29th, 2009, 10:57

Pretty impressive. . .I'd be more interested in finding out what ground texture addon he's using. The question was asked numerous times but he never answered.

Looks like some generic photo scenery. Maybe Tileproxy?

I wonder how the achieved the shadows in the first place...maybe with some new cloud "models"?

Mithrin

August 29th, 2009, 11:22

Looks really nice and soft too those shadows, way cool. Let's hope the impact on frames will be acceptable! :applause:

peter12213

August 29th, 2009, 12:04

WOW!! now thats real looking!!

bushpilot

August 29th, 2009, 12:51

tigisfat

August 29th, 2009, 18:24

They must be photoshopped:bump:. It's a clever scam to sell more copies lol.

On a more serious note, if they can pull that kind of stuff out of FSX without hurting the frames it surely is something revolutionary. :applause::applause:

They never said this concept wouldn't hurt frames. You can bet your car it'll hurt frames, and even then it's still revolutionary,

ryanbatc

August 29th, 2009, 18:30

Hmmm I wonder if it is based on the ground textures, or if it really is the clouds producing the shadow?

djscoo

August 29th, 2009, 20:31

Hmmm I wonder if it is based on the ground textures, or if it really is the clouds producing the shadow?
The only thing I can think of is the clouds are AI "planes" with extremely slow flight plans. If the clouds were actually modeled and set as AI planes they would have shadows that move with them, just like AI. Then again, I may be wrong...

Chacha

August 29th, 2009, 21:50

NICE!!! Really nice!

Eli

Bjoern

August 30th, 2009, 08:46

Hmmm I wonder if it is based on the ground textures, or if it really is the clouds producing the shadow?

I think someone figured out the "Cloud Tool" in the FSX Gamepack for GMax.

Take the cloud model, put kind of a cylinder with transparent sides and half-transparent bottom below it et voilà, cloud shadows.

At least that's how I'd do it.

heywooood

August 30th, 2009, 09:11

yes?

well however they are working it in - count me among those who are concerned about frame rates.

Not because it will affect whether or not I want the add on - but only that I will have to do whatever it takes to make it run smoothly even if it means a whole new rig for ol' heywooood.

MCDesigns

August 30th, 2009, 09:50

I think someone figured out the "Cloud Tool" in the FSX Gamepack for GMax.

That is what I am thinking also. Either way, looking forward to checking it out.

Tweek

August 30th, 2009, 10:41

Kiwikat

August 30th, 2009, 10:48

I suppose it begs the question - how many more 'limitations' can be bypassed in FSX? Considering we never thought something like this would be possible, who knows what other leaps forward in development we may get.

We may not need an FS11 (even though we have no choice in the matter!) if we keep getting revolutionary changes in the sim like this one.

Who knows, some developers are now entirely bypassing the FSX flight dynamics and are simply updating the plane's location from an outside engine. The previously impossible and/or unrealistic VTOL would be a thing of the past if someone decided to spend some (a lot) time and money to work on it. The same is true with aerobatics... :mixedsmi:

Rezabrya

August 30th, 2009, 11:37

Maybe Iris should look into this for their Christen Eagle and their upcoming F-35 :wavey:
On another hand. This is just another example of a developer pushing FSX past it's boundaries. We may get FS11 yet fellas! (or rather, FS10.5)

Who knows, some developers are now entirely bypassing the FSX flight dynamics and are simply updating the plane's location from an outside engine. The previously impossible and/or unrealistic VTOL would be a thing of the past if someone decided to spend some (a lot) time and money to work on it. The same is true with aerobatics... :mixedsmi:

Bjoern

August 30th, 2009, 12:47

I suppose it begs the question - how many more 'limitations' can be bypassed in FSX?

I wouldn't consider the cloud shadows as a "limitation", rather than an unused feature. This would at least explain the "Cloud Tool" in the FSX GMax Gamepack.

Maybe Aces wanted to implement the cloud shadows from the beginning but ran out of time?

wantok

August 30th, 2009, 13:05

Maybe Aces wanted to implement the cloud shadows from the beginning but ran out of time?
..or frame rate killer and was left out.. Looking forward to cloud shadows though.:jump:

limjack

August 30th, 2009, 17:06

Man, just when you thought it could't get any better. This just keep the blood pumping...always a carrot down the road to make FSX even better. I love the dreamers who make these things possible:applause::applause::applause:.

Jim

Daube

August 30th, 2009, 23:20

Who knows, some developers are now entirely bypassing the FSX flight dynamics and are simply updating the plane's location from an outside engine. The previously impossible and/or unrealistic VTOL would be a thing of the past if someone decided to spend some (a lot) time and money to work on it. The same is true with aerobatics... :mixedsmi:

Well, concerning the VTOL, it's already a thing from the past.
The current module (RCB gauges) shows that it's possible, even if the way it's done is not completely realistic...yet... ;)

Gizmo

August 31st, 2009, 03:10

..or frame rate killer and was left out.. Looking forward to cloud shadows though.:jump:

Yep i think i've read that FSX's beta just before RTM had Cloud shadows option but it got pulled from the final build

http://djtaso.com/fsx/fsxcs.jpg

See bottom left tick box

Maybe someone has found a way to renable it or found a way via rewritting the cloud shaders,i look forward to seeing it in motion though & checking out the how to once its relased......i remember peter & chris talking about cloud shadows as something they where looking at adding to FEX but much like all there other promises it became total vapourware.....

One other thing i like to see hacked into FSX (apart from crepuscular rays that is) is Normal/bump mapping for the closest set or 2 of terrain tiles,im pretty sure that some of the screen shots on the FSX RTM installer feature bumpmapped terrain on one of the mountain sides

Interesting times ahead i look forward to checking out the CS once i build myself another gaming/simming/deving rig

laters
steve

crashaz

August 31st, 2009, 10:35

Daube

August 31st, 2009, 10:49

Wow!! If these are seperate cloud shadows... AMAZING!!! I would pay whatever the cost! Especially if the shadows work not only on the ground... but on the aircraft and other objects themselves!!:icon29:
Oh yes, non-illuminated planes and scenery/autogen objects under clouds would be fantastic !

some1

August 31st, 2009, 10:56

Well, this may be the problem, I don't see any autogen on those screens.

Kiwikat

August 31st, 2009, 12:54

Well, concerning the VTOL, it's already a thing from the past.
The current module (RCB gauges) shows that it's possible, even if the way it's done is not completely realistic...yet... ;)

With no disrespect to Rob, it isn't anywhere near as smooth as it could be. His gauge certainly makes it better than it used to be, but it wouldn't come close to a proper external flight model.

I'm sure the money it would cost to design such a thing wouldn't be worth it for any existing VTOL aircraft. The subject material just isn't popular enough among flight simmers.

Daube

August 31st, 2009, 13:14

With no disrespect to Rob, it isn't anywhere near as smooth as it could be. His gauge certainly makes it better than it used to be, but it wouldn't come close to a proper external flight model.

I'm sure the money it would cost to design such a thing wouldn't be worth it for any existing VTOL aircraft. The subject material just isn't popular enough among flight simmers.

I understand what you mean but keep in mind that the fact that Rob's VTOL flight is not realistic doesn't come from a FSX limitation, it's just coming from the way Rob implemented it. In fact, he applies a fix speed depending on the plane angle, but he should have applied an acceleration instead of a speed. In the end, it's just a little mathematic formula to change.

The fact is that FSX allows you to "manipulate" your aicraft movements from an external module. What you choose to do or compute in this module is only up to you. That's what Rob's module is demonstrating.