Jump to content

EDDF v2 issues


Mar97

Recommended Posts

First, thanks for this beautiful looking scenery!

 

But sadly I also have the problem with dropping fps. My test starts at E5 and while looking to the north, everything is fine.
But when turning to the west, the stuttering begins. From 23 down to 10 back to 23 back to 10 and so on. 
I have an i7 4770K 4x4,0Ghz, GTX760 and 16GB RAM. I tested on both: FSX:SP2 and FSX:Acceleration with the result that with Acceleration the stuttering is half as often as in FSX:SP2.

All other scenerys are running better (even the old EDDF, there I got steady 25 fps). In approach I got around 10-14fps until reaching 2nm final, then the stuttering comes again.

I can't identify a special object taking down the fps.

 

Then I would like to ask, if the missing gates (D8A, D5A, D4A, D1A, E2A, E5A, E6A, E9A) will be added in the future.

 

The next issue I get, is an "Aircraft crashed" on N1, L1, L3 and around those taxiways on N and L.

 

Would be really thankful, if somebody has an idea for solving my problem(s), because it's really sad to hear a lot of person having great fps and I've not :(

 

Marius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Made now again a test with everything deactivated except EDDF v2. Still getting the fps problem and the crash problem, so it's definitly caused by EDDF v2. I've heard of some other users experiencing the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Dear Aerosoft,

 

I'm slowly getting really angry!
It's now 3 month after the release of EDDF v2 and there is STILL NO STATEMENT from Aerosoft to the FPS drop problem!
Your actually don't regard the answering of that posts as necessary! It would be enough for me to hear something like "Yes we're working on this" or "No, we do not have any clue about this problem.". But simply ignoring the people ist rediciulous. 
And it's also not a solution to say "Well, on our computer it's working perfectly, so it's your fault.". Because it is NOT my fault, I did NOT publish this scenery.

If you don't know what to do with this problem, fine, then I have to accept this, but PLEASE tell me this, then I'm not sitting every day in front of my computer and waiting, if there comes any solution from aerosoft.
(Unfortunately, I did not really expect a solution or a statement...).

 

Thank you.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maybe you have a look at some of the everal other EDDF threads here in the forum - most (if not all) of your problems are discussed and most are commented be Aerosoft in one way or the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Aerosoft

Indeed, there is not a lot we can say. We simply do not see any unexpected drop in fps on our machines. We do not have any plans to simplify the scenery to make it easier on FPS.

I will forward your message to the project manager and developers though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18.8.2016 at 11:46, Mathijs Kok sagte:

Indeed, there is not a lot we can say. We simply do not see any unexpected drop in fps on our machines. We do not have any plans to simplify the scenery to make it easier on FPS.

I will forward your message to the project manager and developers though.

 

I don't think that you should discard the problem entirely, Mathijs. Mar97 is not the only one with FPS problems in EDDF - as a matter of fact, I have significantly lower FPS in EDDF than in most of my other Aerosoft add-on sceneries (maybe apart from Mega Airport Orly and in some parts also Mega Airport Dublin - but those are still slightly above EDDF's FPS rate), and I have those bad FPS numbers even after turning other sceneries off or turning traffic etc. down. And I believe there were other FSX users reporting FPS problems (besides the VAS problems), too. I only didn't put that much emphasis on the FPS problem because it's the VAS problem which really makes EDDF unflyable for me. Maybe a configuration tool would help not only to decrease the VAS load but also increase the FPS?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

are you using ORBX OLC? - it looks as if this about doubles the amount of trees around EDDF which is significant hit in VAS and frames.

 

as far as I could find out the ORBX trees are not really affected by autogen settings. (just trying to confirm this)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 17 Stunden , data63 sagte:

are you using ORBX OLC? - it looks as if this about doubles the amount of trees around EDDF which is significant hit in VAS and frames.

 

as far as I could find out the ORBX trees are not really affected by autogen settings. (just trying to confirm this)

 

If the question was directed at me: No, I don't use ORBX Open LC. I use ORBX FTX Global, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Deputy Sheriffs

When I was making the video I noticed that the airport is 'hard to handle' keep in mind the shear size and location and if you feel the need to crank up the sliders in FSX it will become even more hard to handle. EDDF has always been a VAS demanding location but I also know that when I turned down my settings it became much easier and didn't run into any issues there other then the usual freeze which happens at ANY scenery even if it's not from Aerosoft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EDDF sure is "hard" on the system but somehow I feel there is something in the surroundings not everyone but a significant amount of users have and that makes it even harder / pushes FSX over the edge.

 

maybe I'm an optimist that thinks a developer doesn't deliberatly develop something most people will not be able to use :rolleyes:.

 

(and NO I didn't put all my sliders to the right end :P)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 16 Stunden , Jeroen Doorman sagte:

When I was making the video I noticed that the airport is 'hard to handle' keep in mind the shear size and location and if you feel the need to crank up the sliders in FSX it will become even more hard to handle. EDDF has always been a VAS demanding location but I also know that when I turned down my settings it became much easier and didn't run into any issues there other then the usual freeze which happens at ANY scenery even if it's not from Aerosoft.

 

Jeroen, as it has been pointed out several times in our (sadly now) multiple discussion threads about the VAS and/or FPS problems in EDDF, for quite a lot of FSX users turning down the settings does help only to a little or even to no extent. We even get high VAS usage with little traffic, all other sceneries switched off etc.. Of course one can do a few things to ease the VAS and maybe even the FPS load. I, for example, deactivated Aerosoft's Egelsbach scenery - and that gave at least those extra 2 or 3 % of VAS which helped me to at least take off from EDDF in my PMDG 777. But you have to get this: You can get OOMs even if you are not landing, but simply taxiing from your gate to the take-off runway in EDDF. This is very, very unusual and I never ran into such problems with any other scenery by any developer (including my many Aerosoft sceneries).

 

Terblanche had the suspicion that there could be some sort of problem with FTX Vector or even FTX Global Base in combination with EDDF's terrain scenery which might lead to that huge VAS loss. Nevertheless, sadly he still had an OOM even after deactivating the terrain (while still running FTX Vector). I don't use FTX Vector, but only FTX Global Base and if I find time during the next few days, I will try and see whether my VAS problems vanish when I deactivate the terrain as well while keeping FTX Global Base active.

 

But actually I digress. Mar97 was reporting on FPS, not VAS problems. But I suspect there could be a connection between the FPS and the VAS problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Deputy Sheriffs
1 hour ago, FWAviation said:

 

Jeroen, as it has been pointed out several times in our (sadly now) multiple discussion threads about the VAS and/or FPS problems in EDDF, for quite a lot of FSX users turning down the settings does help only to a little or even to no extent. We even get high VAS usage with little traffic, all other sceneries switched off etc.. Of course one can do a few things to ease the VAS and maybe even the FPS load. I, for example, deactivated Aerosoft's Egelsbach scenery - and that gave at least those extra 2 or 3 % of VAS which helped me to at least take off from EDDF in my PMDG 777. But you have to get this: You can get OOMs even if you are not landing, but simply taxiing from your gate to the take-off runway in EDDF. This is very, very unusual and I never ran into such problems with any other scenery by any developer (including my many Aerosoft sceneries).

 

Terblanche had the suspicion that there could be some sort of problem with FTX Vector or even FTX Global Base in combination with EDDF's terrain scenery which might lead to that huge VAS loss. Nevertheless, sadly he still had an OOM even after deactivating the terrain (while still running FTX Vector). I don't use FTX Vector, but only FTX Global Base and if I find time during the next few days, I will try and see whether my VAS problems vanish when I deactivate the terrain as well while keeping FTX Global Base active.

 

But actually I digress. Mar97 was reporting on FPS, not VAS problems. But I suspect there could be a connection between the FPS and the VAS problems.

Fabian, my guess is that that's your name looking at your emailaddress ;)

 

ORBX is known for having an impact on VAS, Vector does that as well as Global, every scenery does or plane. What I find somewhat 'amusing' is that people want this and what that all put into a scenery and they keep adding more and more to their sim and then start 'complaining' when they run into issues and blame the developer for creating such a 'bad performance' scenery. When you install stuff, even if it's located on the other side of the world, the sim will load that as well in some way, it has been mentioned many times on many forums before that this has an impact (the use a simstarter can help people out in this section). We all know that FSX is an outdated platform running on 32bit. Combine all these things including the location of this airport and the size and you have a recipe to run into issues. Sure, one can have more issues than the other but that goes for any type of software and not just a outdated flightsim. If you want less issues you have 3 options, use P3D V3, runs much better, use FSX:SE, runs a bit better, stop flying ;) now this last one might not be an option :)

 

I've seen people saying stuff that that other developer that didn't make this airport could have done a better job. I'm not saying he couldn't have done that but I'm also wondering how he would have been able to do so knowing the location is a 'challenge' for any developer. There is another developer well known and has an amazing reputation and created Toronto. They are known for very good VAS and FPS usage but still Toronto caused an enormous amount of OOM for people including me. The size and location also played a role there.

 

Now after using FSX for such a long time and reading many forums I know that the above mentioned isn't just a fairytale :)

 

I do hope you can achieve better FPS/VAS on your system as it would take away that bitter taste on your end about this scenery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 5 Stunden , Jeroen Doorman sagte:

Fabian, my guess is that that's your name looking at your emailaddress ;)

 

ORBX is known for having an impact on VAS, Vector does that as well as Global, every scenery does or plane. What I find somewhat 'amusing' is that people want this and what that all put into a scenery and they keep adding more and more to their sim and then start 'complaining' when they run into issues and blame the developer for creating such a 'bad performance' scenery. When you install stuff, even if it's located on the other side of the world, the sim will load that as well in some way, it has been mentioned many times on many forums before that this has an impact (the use a simstarter can help people out in this section). We all know that FSX is an outdated platform running on 32bit. Combine all these things including the location of this airport and the size and you have a recipe to run into issues. Sure, one can have more issues than the other but that goes for any type of software and not just a outdated flightsim. If you want less issues you have 3 options, use P3D V3, runs much better, use FSX:SE, runs a bit better, stop flying ;) now this last one might not be an option :)

 

I've seen people saying stuff that that other developer that didn't make this airport could have done a better job. I'm not saying he couldn't have done that but I'm also wondering how he would have been able to do so knowing the location is a 'challenge' for any developer. There is another developer well known and has an amazing reputation and created Toronto. They are known for very good VAS and FPS usage but still Toronto caused an enormous amount of OOM for people including me. The size and location also played a role there.

 

Now after using FSX for such a long time and reading many forums I know that the above mentioned isn't just a fairytale :)

 

I do hope you can achieve better FPS/VAS on your system as it would take away that bitter taste on your end about this scenery.

 

First of all, I'm a bit surprised that you refer to my e-mail address which is not publicly visible in my profile, if I'm informed correctly. I have no general problem with being adressed by my first name, but since that and my e-mail address belong to my privacy, I would prefer to decide myself where and when I use those personal information in public online chats or forum discussions. Thank you!

 

Secondly: Yes, I get what you mean. But if there's one thing that I am fed up about in this whole EDDF VAS debate is that Terblanche, I and all the other users having those VAS problems repeatedly have to justify ourselves for complaints made by other users or for allegedly "simply having too much stuff installed in your FSX or having your fsx.cfg tweaked too much". It's particularly annoying since we already pointed out several times (and, as a matter of fact, I just did that again in my previous post) that we still have those severe VAS problems even after switching all other sceneries besides EDDF (and maybe our origin or destination airport) off and turning our settings down. So you might have a point if we encountered no VAS problems after switching everything off. But the contrary is the case.

 

I agree that you cannot always blame the developer. But on the other hand, it's not always the user/customer who is to blame. Sometimes the truth might be somewhere in the middle and a mix of human and/or technical flaws leads to such errors, sometimes it might be that only one side has to take the blame. But if you don't investigate into the problem, you will never know who or what really is to blame.

 

And, again: If my other sceneries run decently in FSX even while having them all active, while EDDF is running badly even after having de-activated all other sceneries, there must be something wrong. And this is the only thing Mar97, Terblanche, I and all the other affected users are asking for from the Aerosoft team: Please take our problems seriously and don't discard them with an answer of the "on our clean systems, EDDF runs just fine. So please clean up your systems and at best, don't operate any other scenery besides EDDF" kind. That's not how FSX  or any other flight simulation software is commonly used, and that is also not how one should treat paying and often also loyal customers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Deputy Sheriffs
53 minutes ago, FWAviation said:

 

First of all, I'm a bit surprised that you refer to my e-mail address which is not publicly visible in my profile, if I'm informed correctly. I have no general problem with being adressed by my first name, but since that and my e-mail address belong to my privacy, I would prefer to decide myself where and when I use those personal information in public online chats or forum discussions. Thank you!

 

 

As a forum 'moderator' I can see more and as I called you by your firstname, what I like to do when I'm talking to someone, I didn't state any emailaddress of yours, that's something I wasn't aiming for and wasn't the point of my post ;)

 

I'm not blaming you nor am I blaming the developer I'm just stating my observation and some facts. That those facts aren't applied to you or other users that DO experience the issue will mean that there is something else going on which is hard to pin point if one can't recreate the same issue.

As I said, I hope it gets resolved for you and the other users to take away that bitter taste ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 10 Stunden , FWAviation sagte:

 

Jeroen, as it has been pointed out several times in our (sadly now) multiple discussion threads about the VAS and/or FPS problems in EDDF, for quite a lot of FSX users turning down the settings does help only to a little or even to no extent. We even get high VAS usage with little traffic, all other sceneries switched off etc.. Of course one can do a few things to ease the VAS and maybe even the FPS load. I, for example, deactivated Aerosoft's Egelsbach scenery - and that gave at least those extra 2 or 3 % of VAS which helped me to at least take off from EDDF in my PMDG 777. But you have to get this: You can get OOMs even if you are not landing, but simply taxiing from your gate to the take-off runway in EDDF. This is very, very unusual and I never ran into such problems with any other scenery by any developer (including my many Aerosoft sceneries).

 

Terblanche had the suspicion that there could be some sort of problem with FTX Vector or even FTX Global Base in combination with EDDF's terrain scenery which might lead to that huge VAS loss. Nevertheless, sadly he still had an OOM even after deactivating the terrain (while still running FTX Vector). I don't use FTX Vector, but only FTX Global Base and if I find time during the next few days, I will try and see whether my VAS problems vanish when I deactivate the terrain as well while keeping FTX Global Base active.

 

But actually I digress. Mar97 was reporting on FPS, not VAS problems. But I suspect there could be a connection between the FPS and the VAS problems.

 

Problem is: you can't really disable OLC Base as it mainly changes/replaces textures in the main FSX texture folder and (that's the problem) rewrites some of the FSX core libraries (e.g. LC lookup-Tables). It also leaves some BGL's in the main Scenery/world folders which cannot be deactivated. (but you could scan that folder and manually disable the BGL's not knowing what they do)

 

Also ORBX has some tendency to tweak autogen in a way it isn't affected by your fsx.cfg autogen settings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@data63 Thank you for the information and advice, Jürgen. Well, what I meant was that I will try to deactivate the terrain around EDDF, not FTX Global (because I already knew that it cannot be removed properly). Because that's what Terblanche did as well in his own test.

 

Anyway, I just made that very test (deactivating the EDDF terrain entry in my scenery library) but I still noticed a heavy VAS use of 85 to 90 % with a simple taxiing in my PMDG 777 from the gate to the take-off runway. So the result is the same like when I keep the EDDF terrain activated. But maybe there's some sort of other incompatibility between EDDF files and FTX Global files? Or there's a wholly different cause for that heavy VAS use.

 

@Jeroen Doorman Okay, I appreciate your statement - but your initital statement really sounded a bit as if you are laughing about those VAS problems. Hence my annoyed reaction.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FWAviation said:

@Jeroen Doorman Okay, I appreciate your statement - but your initital statement really sounded a bit as if you are laughing about those VAS problems. Hence my annoyed reaction.

 

Excellent response!  That's the way we should all work together!  Thanks!

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use