Jump to content

Any patch for non visible AI?


Recommended Posts

Hi,

Have been searching for a good solution to the problem with non visible AI in Mega scenery Stockholm Arlanda X, but without success.

With all due respect, but turning off shadows shouldnt be the right solution to this. The AI traffic is visible perfectly well in all "non Aerosoft" sceneries in FSX without turning off the shadows. Do you really mean that we purchase sceneries from Aerosoft and have to turn off shadows all the time we fly on those airports?

How about everyone who really like to have the shadows turned on?

Can we expect a patch soon to this problem, or do we have to go back to the default sceneries? ;)B)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can replace you AI Traffic. If you use a traffic addon, which only has FSX compatible models, the shadowproblem is gone. Only AI Aircraft based on the FS9 Code in combination with the used BGL coded Runwayslights (needed, when having full detailed multilayered Airportgrounds and not only AFX based layouts) will generate the effect, that the old models are not visable, because the FSX has a bug in the shadowroutine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can replace you AI Traffic. If you use a traffic addon, which only has FSX compatible models, the shadowproblem is gone. Only AI Aircraft based on the FS9 Code in combination with the used BGL coded Runwayslights (needed, when having full detailed multilayered Airportgrounds and not only AFX based layouts) will generate the effect, that the old models are not visable, because the FSX has a bug in the shadowroutine.

However, you can see even FS9 coded AI planes on all the default airports in FSX, without turning off the shadows. I will not replace all the thousand of selfmade AI movements just to make AI work in a Aerosoft scenery. And the models in the AI addons which will work in FSX are just horrible.

There has to be some way to make some kind of update to your sceneries. It is certainly not only me who has the problem. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Staffan,

I believe Oliver explained the situation to you regarding the AI Aircraft and Shadows.

To prove what he is saying I have attached a picture with my aircraft casting a shadow and the AI still visible at ESSA.

This is with an AI program that uses fully compliant FSX models.

post-3-125285986456_thumb.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Staffan,

I believe Oliver explained the situation to you regarding the AI Aircraft and Shadows.

To prove what he is saying I have attached a picture with my aircraft casting a shadow and the AI still visible at ESSA.

This is with an AI program that uses fully compliant FSX models.

Hello Shaun,

I know, but the AI still doesn´t cast shadows in your picture. It is like all aircraft are hovering above the tarmac. And that doesn´t give the imerson effect IMO.

Is that Traffic X you are using? The models in your picture does infact look much better than both MyTraffic X and Traffic X.

I must be stupid, but how can a scenery that is developed without FSX standards, have a "shadowbug that is in the FSX platform" when the default scenery can handle FS9 coded AI aircraft with shadows!?........ How can that be a bug?

Take care,

Link to post
Share on other sites

What program are you using, Shaun? I get my FS9 AI from World of AI, and what few I've tried in FSX seem ok.

I use strictly WOAI as well. I have no traffic (visible) at mega EGLL X. I too feel that "turn the shadows off" is an unacceptable solution. ALL other companies sceneries work just fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Folks,

The question was to see the AI with Aircraft cast shadows on the ground enabled.

This was duly done and showed they do show if the AI model is 100% FSX compatible.

As to why they dont show on the ground for the AI now at Arlanda is not an AI thing alone as the user aircraft doesn't

leave a shadow by the gate either. This is probably to do with the nature of the way the scenery was built.

The AI Traffic program used is Ultimate Traffic 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is probably to do with the nature of the way the scenery was built.

This is exactly what I thought was the matter at hand. The scenery. If the "other guys" sceneries all work absolutely fine with other AI packages , and AS does not, I would say that it DEFINITELY is due to the way the scenery was built. And I thought the question was will there be a patch to address this. Maybe I am mistaken...:blush:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres a way of changing the FS9 style of routing for WOAI to FSX style, would this solve the problem or is it just the models (thing is some of the WOAI models are far superior to the Payware versions so Im hardly going to change it and I have to agree, how come others UK2000 ,Cloud 9. Fly Tampa. etc etc can solve or get round this issue)..

Link to post
Share on other sites

As to why they dont show on the ground for the AI now at Arlanda is not an AI thing alone as the user aircraft doesn't

leave a shadow by the gate either. This is probably to do with the nature of the way the scenery was built.

The AI Traffic program used is Ultimate Traffic 2.

Hi Shaun,

Well,....what can I say, exept that this is sad.

I am a hardcore FS9 guy myself. I am just helping a friends kid to install and tweak his birthday gift (FSX). After having tweaked the thing for some considderable time, it was time to install his favourite airport, Mega Scenery Stockholm Arlanda X. But just to find out that the addon doesn´t work as it should in FSX, even though all default airports work with all freeware addon AI. This fact makes it even harder for me to even considder to install FSX myself. If this is a trend, that even when FSX itself is not fully backcompatible with FS9 stuff (which is understandable to a certain extent), now also addons like Aerosoft sceneries even skipps FSX platform standards that works with all AI, makes it very hard to understand.

Do you seriously mean that the only way to see AI in your airports with shadows, is to buy some payware AI addons with terrible FSX models, when there are so many freeware FS9 AI addons with just beautiful models, that actually work in all default FSX airports? Also to add all simmers who uses many of their flyable FS9 aircraft as AI.

One thing that is even more sad, is that not even one single line in the product information, mention anything about that the the airports can not show anything else than FSX model AI. And how many good FSX AI models are there to choose from? -_-

Features:

* All important buildings created with the aid of real photographs of the airport

* Dynamic and animated objects

* High resolution day- and night textures

* High resolution areal photo texture

* Seasonal textures

* Docking systems

* Corrected landclass files

* Taxiways, apron with realistic rendered textures

* Complete apron markings

* AI compatible

* FSX and FS2004 version included

* FS2004 version compatible with AES

Thanks,..but no thanks. Off to uninstall Aerosoft airports. And no additional purchase from Aerosoft before some solution to this major problem has been taking care of by the airport developers.

Roger and out....... ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Staffan,

Sorry you feel that way but when an airport says its AI Compatible this is to say that the AI will park correctly at gates and use the sceneries taxiways etc.

You state that this AI Traffic payware program has terrible models, would you like to be a little more specific about what you actually mean, are you referring to visually or something else..

If we sell an FSX scenery why do we have to state that FS9 compliant AI Traffic is not compatible with it.

If your going to use an FS9 product in FSX then thats your right, but you cannot blame anyone else if it doesn't work properly!

I mean its like going into a car spares outlet and saying why doesn't it say on this Mitsubishi headlamp box that it cant be used on a Toyota.

If you buy it and try to use it on the Toyota you can hardly blame the outlet if it doesn't work now can you.

I will however ask though why the shadows do not show at the gates at Arlanda X.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardly a correct an analogy Shaun when one considers that there are a substantial high percentage of add on scenerys that do work... Using analogys like this is a cheep trick.

Lets face it Aerosoft is hardly blameless when it comes to misleading advertising.. Having just returned from a conference in Madeira I was tempted to buy the FSX version of this but I now know the quote below from the selling page is only true in the letter of the description rather than the spirit..

to quote

"Approaching runway 05 you follow a set of 'lead-in' landing lights over a curved path that allow you land on the runway without crashing into the mountains. Under bad weather not an easy task."

I would expect those to be flashing guiding lights like the prototype, but I was tipped off before buying that this is not the case and they cant even be seen during the day or picked out at night from the scenery!

Whats this got to do with AI.. Because when I look at the forum I keep seeing the same answers..

It seems Fly Tampa and other developers are willing to give us protoypical lead in lights at Kai Tak but the Aerosoft developer can't work out how to do it at Madeira (did they try asking).. And here we have other developers who have managed to solve the shadow issue but Aerosoft hasn't.. With the latest flicker mipmaps mess its starting to look like a case of rush products out without refining them and then blame the buyer for not having the correct addons or system..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Staffan,

If we sell an FSX scenery why do we have to state that FS9 compliant AI Traffic is not compatible with it.

If your going to use an FS9 product in FSX then thats your right, but you cannot blame anyone else if it doesn't work properly!

I will however ask though why the shadows do not show at the gates at Arlanda X

Hi Shaun,

But the least I would expect from a scenery made with the FSX SDK, is that it uses the same basic SDK standard as the default FSX sceneries. And they are all infact fully compatible with FS9 models, with shadows and all.

The models available in FSX AI addons are just horrible looking, compared with for example, WOAI and PAI, which are FS9 freeware AI. And,...again.....even if they are FS9 models.....they work in each and every default scenery in FSX,...but for some strange reason,....not in Aerosoft sceneries.

This only shows that Aerosoft sceneries doesn´t even follow the SDK for FSX, meaning that they infact, when all comes around, arent even true FSX sceneries. ;)

After reading various posts I doubt that the problem only is in the Arlanda scenery, but in more Aerosoft FSX sceneries.

Maybe users of other Aerosoft sceneries could list more airports with this problem. :rolleyes:

Below you can clearly see that FS9 model AI are fully compatible with FSX default sceneries also with shadows. In this particular picture WOAI (World of AI) planes are used at Arlanda.

Image1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Folks,

Every designer has secrets that they are not always willing to share.

Bet you Realair will never disclose how they make there aircraft do such realistic things there aircraft can do, but then the customer

going to another developer and saying, well if he can do it why cant you.

More than likely the same with FlyTampa, a lot of things sometimes are hard coded and not done by the book.

The lead in lights are there but not very bright I admit and dont flash except for the first one.

I've also heard of a Shadow Bug in FSX but need to look at this a little more to see what it actually is.

As for the aircraft shadows this is also down to the way the scenery is designed as mentioned before.

Its not just some Aerosoft titles that dont have them I have seen other sceneries too with an even more perculiar

shadow issue.

As I say people use different methods even possibly to get more highly realistic looking textures or better surfaces etc and this may be the reason

for some of the issues.

I mean we only have to look at the NiceX thread,sometimes we have to compromise sharpness with shimmering, you can either live with it or you cannot, the only option by the sounds of it is to have smoother less defined textures.

But if you want to fly your AI into airports without the hassle of not seeing them then maybe its a good move to get fully complaint FSX models, if you dont want to go that way then just leave the aircraft casts shadows on the ground turned off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Folks,

Every designer has secrets that they are not always willing to share.

Bet you Realair will never disclose how they make there aircraft do such realistic things there aircraft can do, but then the customer

going to another developer and saying, well if he can do it why cant you.

More than likely the same with FlyTampa, a lot of things sometimes are hard coded and not done by the book.

The lead in lights are there but not very bright I admit and dont flash except for the first one.

I've also heard of a Shadow Bug in FSX but need to look at this a little more to see what it actually is.

As for the aircraft shadows this is also down to the way the scenery is designed as mentioned before.

Its not just some Aerosoft titles that dont have them I have seen other sceneries too with an even more perculiar

shadow issue.

As I say people use different methods even possibly to get more highly realistic looking textures or better surfaces etc and this may be the reason

for some of the issues.

I mean we only have to look at the NiceX thread,sometimes we have to compromise sharpness with shimmering, you can either live with it or you cannot, the only option by the sounds of it is to have smoother less defined textures.

But if you want to fly your AI into airports without the hassle of not seeing them then maybe its a good move to get fully complaint FSX models, if you dont want to go that way then just leave the aircraft casts shadows on the ground turned off.

Hi Shaun,

Well well,....certainly not the answer I, or many other simmers had hoped for. :mellow:

But when reading "between your lines",....I get the feeling that your scenery developers has to do more homework. The answers are right there,..in the SDK. And if the SDK is read more thorough, I am sure that even the developers can make miracles. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

instead opening a new topic I will use this one. I have a similar problem I can’t see other traffic when I’m on line (IvAo) in LFMN or EBBR but when going to EDDF I can see moving traffic there!!!

When going to default airports in FSX I see the traffic.

Any Idea please.

FSX sp2 Vista 32 sp2 no shadow on ground and disable Directx10

Regards,

Waleed

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

That sounds great !

Thanks for your efforts. :)

Yes, it is a true bugger for many simmers. And if I was you, I would put a note about this on the frontpage. ;)

Just saw this thread now and have to throw in a few remarks. While I argued a lot along your lines for years, the airport designers have convinced me that there is no way to have airports with all the ground features the new Aerosoft FSX airports have using FSX ground code alone. So the only options are:

1) Full support of FS9 AI aircraft with shadows, and sub optimal night light behaviour of the airports - or -

2) Optimal airports with limited support for legacy AI aircraft.

Aerosoft has decided for way 2). This caused me thousands of hours of work, but fortunately all this is done. It is a known fact that FSX coded aircraft not only don't have this shadow problem, but also perform about 3 times faster and look far better than emulated FS9 aircraft. So I think it is a better way to go to use real FSX SP2 AI aircraft and optimal airports. If there is a question to ask, it is why do the free AI packages still contain aircraft in FS8 data format ( they aren't FS9, they all are FS8 ). Has this to do with the attitude on the forums of these packages which has demotivated the designers and sent them fishing?

You imply in your message that the models used in professional AI packages are worse than those by WOAI. While this was true for FS9, where the models had to be 7 times faster to get decent frame rates back in 2005, this is not true for 2009. Ultimate Traffic 2 as example has licensed all the Aardvark planes and converted them to FSX format - and they look in FSX between the same and slightly better depending on light, just are significantly faster - so that claim is history. The new high polygon AI aircraft in MyTraffic 2010 don't have anything in common with those models that were optimized for the slow inefficient grafics engine of FS9.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Burkhard,

I have the same opinion as you, I think FSX needs FSX-models and no oldtimers with FS8-code. But traffic did not consist of Jetliners alone like in MyTraffic and UT2, but also of GA-aircraft. And unfortunalty there are absolute no FSX AI-models of small Cessnas and Pipers and so on.

So as long as there are no compatible models, there will be no acceptable solution.

Bernhard

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw this thread now and have to throw in a few remarks. While I argued a lot along your lines for years, the airport designers have convinced me that there is no way to have airports with all the ground features the new Aerosoft FSX airports have using FSX ground code alone. So the only options are:

1) Full support of FS9 AI aircraft with shadows, and sub optimal night light behaviour of the airports - or -

2) Optimal airports with limited support for legacy AI aircraft.

Aerosoft has decided for way 2). This caused me thousands of hours of work, but fortunately all this is done. It is a known fact that FSX coded aircraft not only don't have this shadow problem, but also perform about 3 times faster and look far better than emulated FS9 aircraft. So I think it is a better way to go to use real FSX SP2 AI aircraft and optimal airports. If there is a question to ask, it is why do the free AI packages still contain aircraft in FS8 data format ( they aren't FS9, they all are FS8 ). Has this to do with the attitude on the forums of these packages which has demotivated the designers and sent them fishing?

You imply in your message that the models used in professional AI packages are worse than those by WOAI. While this was true for FS9, where the models had to be 7 times faster to get decent frame rates back in 2005, this is not true for 2009. Ultimate Traffic 2 as example has licensed all the Aardvark planes and converted them to FSX format - and they look in FSX between the same and slightly better depending on light, just are significantly faster - so that claim is history. The new high polygon AI aircraft in MyTraffic 2010 don't have anything in common with those models that were optimized for the slow inefficient grafics engine of FS9.

I do not agree with you when you say that there already are satifactory FSX AI models. We tried Ultimate Traffic 2, but the one you talk about was maybe produced in just one copy, because the aircraft in the copy we installed, looks just horrible. ;)

The person I helped installing FSX, purchased UT2, My Traffic X and Traffic X. And no one of those products has even close to satisfying models or paints. The result was to uninstall the Aerosoft sceneries, trash the FSX AI commercial addons and go for other sceneries (even default), that can handle all the beautiful FS9 AI models with shadows turned on.

What about all simmers who are "cooking" their own freeware AI? How many true FSX AI models can they choose from?

All this hazzle, just to make the AI work as it should with shadows and all, just for sceneries from one developer. :unsure:

Anyway, I think I can speak for thousands of simmers when I say thank you to Aerosoft, for sorting out this problem at last for so many users. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...