ptr7000 11 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 I wont even download 1.02. Fair enough. Thanks. I wouldn't bother it still doesn't work. If I can't get a refund for this, I am going to have to seek consumer advice as there has to be some redress. Then I'm giving up the hobby after ten years as I'm sick of all this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xstasus 13 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 I wont even download 1.02. Fair enough. Thanks. Didn't work for me, what a piece of ****. I am totally unsatisfied with this product, the quality is substandard, as well is the performance. "is wondering how they test the product before release". Pushing out sceneries asap is one thing however no eye for detail and performance is a total other thing. One more thing, not a word from Aerosoft.... Guys if you want to fix the issue you can always contact us, we wont bite! Edit: sorry for the language, but i feel Aerosoft is only cashing in the profits, however gives zero product support Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Santoro 77 Posted March 20, 2014 Author Share Posted March 20, 2014 After installing 1.02... I wouldn't bother it still doesn't work. If I can't get a refund for this, I am going to have to seek consumer advice as there has to be some redress. Then I'm giving up the hobby after ten years as I'm sick of all this. Didn't work for me, what a piece of ****. I am totally unsatisfied with this product, the quality is substandard, as well is the performance. "is wondering how they test the product before release". Pushing out sceneries asap is one thing however no eye for detail and performance is a total other thing. One more thing, not a word from Aerosoft.... Guys if you want to fix the issue you can always contact us, we wont bite! Edit: sorry for the language, but i feel Aerosoft is only cashing in the profits, however gives zero product support Guys, My curiosity was bigger than my unhappiness, so I decided to try version 1.02 I installed the new version, opened FSX without changing anything through the scenery config tool and just loaded EIDW. AI traffic was working perfectly! Then I though: "this scenery is totally crazy! The update didn't work for one and and is now working for me". I did test the scenery twice just to make sure and AI traffic was fine. Then I opened the scenery config tool and switched textures res to 1024, removed volumetric grass, opened FSX once again and loaded EIDW and guess what? AI traffic was messed up again. Just to let you know, when I installed the scenery I selected the option to disable animated flags. Well, it leads me to think that the problem, in this case, is related to the scenery config tool. Oh, and I'm still having huge stutter. Edit.: Volumetric grass seems to be corrupting AI traffic. I did another test. Re-enabled 2048 textures and kept the grass disabled and AI traffic was still crazy. Then I switched textures back to 1024 and enable volumetric grass and the traffic worked fine. It would be useful if you and more people, including Aerosoft team, did the same testing just in order to confirm this or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubliner 3 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Edit.: Volumetric grass seems to be corrupting AI traffic. I did another test. Re-enabled 2048 textures and kept the grass disabled and AI traffic was still crazy. Then I switched textures back to 1024 and enable volumetric grass and the traffic worked fine. It would be useful if you and more people, including Aerosoft team, did the same testing just in order to confirm this or not. Just tried this. Textures 1024, volumetric grass on. Still had the vertical AI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Santoro 77 Posted March 20, 2014 Author Share Posted March 20, 2014 Just tried this. Textures 1024, volumetric grass on. Still had the vertical AI Have you disabled animated flags when installed the scenery? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenbgs 0 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 I also tried this not much luck im affraid. Which addons have we all in common for this part of the world? I have FTX IRl and deleted Eiresim EIDW prior to Aerosofts version.Could the problem be with either of these? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Santoro 77 Posted March 20, 2014 Author Share Posted March 20, 2014 I also tried this not much luck im affraid. Which addons have we all in common for this part of the world? I have FTX IRl and deleted Eiresim EIDW prior to Aerosofts version.Could the problem be with either of these? Did you try with animated flags off? I have nothing for Ireland except Aerosoft's EIDW. I don't have any Orbx addon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayWatson 1 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 I tried to run Dublin again last night, using the suggested settings of textures @ 1024, no animated flags and volumetric grass disabled. This certainly negated any OOMs from manifesting, so that was progress for me. I was flying in an AEX. However now I have moved beyond OOMs occurring almost within 1-2 minutes of trying to taxi to the runway, I have to say that the performance of the airport is certainly not smooth. I'm running an i7 @ 4.3Ghz, 16GB of gaming grade memory, a GTX780 (3GB) and all running under Win 7 64bit and using DX9 (FSX). The only scenery that I am running (in this region) is FTX Ireland (FTX Global) so I am not running anything above and beyond that which is supported. I then switched my textures back to 4096 and restarted FSX. Once loaded, I setup my AEX at the gate, using Taxi2Gate's LTBA (Istanbul). I taxied to the runway but throughout my LTBA experience the frame-rate was silky smooth and it just left me wondering what could be so different between Istanbul and Dublin so as to create such a chasm of distinction in respective performances? I own a plethora of Aerosoft airports and to be honest Dublin is the first one (Aerosoft) I have seen bring my PC to its knees. I'm not upset or disappointed as I enter into any airport purchase knowing that there is always a potential for performance issues and I've just learnt to accept them when I experience them (though ORBX BNE did generate a fairly emotive reaction when I first ran that on my old rig). I also experienced similar issues recently with UK2000's LHR v3 and I simply don't use it because I have other airports I love. If anyone has any suggestions that will improve the current situation then I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephenbgs 0 Posted March 20, 2014 Share Posted March 20, 2014 Did you try with animated flags off? I have nothing for Ireland except Aerosoft's EIDW. I don't have any Orbx addon. Yeah i installed 3 times v1 1.01 1.02 all with flags off. running 1024 and grass off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Santoro 77 Posted March 21, 2014 Author Share Posted March 21, 2014 I have to say that the performance of the airport is certainly not smooth. I taxied to the runway but throughout my LTBA experience the frame-rate was silky smooth and it just left me wondering what could be so different between Istanbul and Dublin so as to create such a chasm of distinction in respective performances? All I can say is that I've never had as much stutter as I'm having at Dublin. Regarding your question about LTBA vs EIDW I ask myself the same. Guys, I'm sorry but I'm clueless wright now. I did all I could to try to find the source of the problems we are all having. I pass the word to Aerosoft and hope they manage to fix the scenery, otherwise I'll request a refund. Sorry for the double post. Something went wrong with my internet connection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Santoro 77 Posted March 21, 2014 Author Share Posted March 21, 2014 I have to say that the performance of the airport is certainly not smooth. I taxied to the runway but throughout my LTBA experience the frame-rate was silky smooth and it just left me wondering what could be so different between Istanbul and Dublin so as to create such a chasm of distinction in respective performances? All I can say is that I've never had as much stutter as I'm having at Dublin. Regarding your question about LTBA vs EIDW I ask myself the same. Guys, I'm sorry but I'm clueless wright now. I did all I could to try to find the source of the problems we are all having. I pass the word to Aerosoft and hope they manage to fix the scenery, otherwise I'll request a refund. Sorry for the double post. Something went wrong with my internet connection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Murchison 18 Posted March 21, 2014 Share Posted March 21, 2014 I have not had major issues with Dublin other than the autogen exclude and have found things have run reasonably well, though I have noted FPS are not as good as OSLO v2. I have not encountered an OOM at this stage. I'm not sure if this video will help or annoy, but its what I am getting using the following set-up so if you have a similar system and are getting OOM's then it does suggest settings need to be considered: Intel Core i7 4770K OC'd to 4.5ghz Corsair Hydro Series H100i Liquid Cooler Intel Z87 Chipset Motherboard 16GB DDR3-1866 RAM 120Gb SSD - For Windows 7, Office etc. 512Gb SSD - For FSX and P3Dv2. Nvidia Geforce GTX 780 3Gb GDDR5 Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit In the video are the following add-ons: Coolsky DC-9 (McPhat standard def external textures and HD cockpit textures) REX 4 FTX Ireland (Global and Vector as well) FS Global Mesh Ultimate Traffic 2 set to around 50% in both daily and weekly traffic Aerosoft Dublin - Flags, grass and HD textures all enabled and installed to be compatible with FTX Ire https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=796871277007777&set=vb.423630634331845&type=3&theater The VAS conversation has been very good and I will be making some changes as I get low frames using the Just Flight DC-8 so would expect to see some improvements as a result of removing flags, grass and going to 1024 textures. I do understand peoples frustration, I typically find Aerosoft scenery to be some of the best performing but I am thinking if development has finally caught up with FSX's limitations. I did note that performance in P3Dv2 was almost double FSX, but that's without AI and I am sure the VAS issues are no different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubliner 3 Posted March 21, 2014 Share Posted March 21, 2014 Have you disabled animated flags when installed the scenery? Flags were off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubliner 3 Posted March 21, 2014 Share Posted March 21, 2014 I tried to run Dublin again last night, using the suggested settings of textures @ 1024, no animated flags and volumetric grass disabled. This certainly negated any OOMs from manifesting, so that was progress for me. I was flying in an AEX. However now I have moved beyond OOMs occurring almost within 1-2 minutes of trying to taxi to the runway, I have to say that the performance of the airport is certainly not smooth. I'm running an i7 @ 4.3Ghz, 16GB of gaming grade memory, a GTX780 (3GB) and all running under Win 7 64bit and using DX9 (FSX). The only scenery that I am running (in this region) is FTX Ireland (FTX Global) so I am not running anything above and beyond that which is supported. I then switched my textures back to 4096 and restarted FSX. Once loaded, I setup my AEX at the gate, using Taxi2Gate's LTBA (Istanbul). I taxied to the runway but throughout my LTBA experience the frame-rate was silky smooth and it just left me wondering what could be so different between Istanbul and Dublin so as to create such a chasm of distinction in respective performances? I own a plethora of Aerosoft airports and to be honest Dublin is the first one (Aerosoft) I have seen bring my PC to its knees. I'm not upset or disappointed as I enter into any airport purchase knowing that there is always a potential for performance issues and I've just learnt to accept them when I experience them (though ORBX BNE did generate a fairly emotive reaction when I first ran that on my old rig). I also experienced similar issues recently with UK2000's LHR v3 and I simply don't use it because I have other airports I love. If anyone has any suggestions that will improve the current situation then I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks. I'd suggest the following... These settings are giving me acceptable performance at EIDW (at least 20 fps with NGX)... reduced AI aircraft/vehicles/cars reduced AA set lod_radius to default 4.5 installed 1024 clouds set fsx.cfg to 1024 set EIDW config to 1024, no flags/grass reduced autogen to normal This is on a i5 2500k 4.4ghz, 8gb ram, GTX 560 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_auau 5 Posted March 21, 2014 Share Posted March 21, 2014 Mathijs, That's easy have 40 fps without weather, without AI traffic, without airplane, without panel, without lights effect, without all traffic road option, without autogène ... etc ... In this way, on my système I have more 60 fps ... If you follow this way for test your product, I understand why a lot of customers are disappointed and unsatisfied about ... On my mid range pc iam just using a amd video card and not o/c at all, no tweaks in my fsx.cfg and using asn as my weather engine and rex4 as my texture. Using ut2 at 100 percent and installed Dublin with all high settings. Uisng the pmdg ngx sitting on the ground using the vc view I get around the 18 to 21 fps the same as taxing around the airport and havnt had any ooms at all. All my fsx addons are installed outside the default location and in a separate drive. If I can run with no issues than cant see why others cant do it since most others have a more powerful pc than I have. And to point out I havnt got any other issues with any other addons that Iam using. So I assuming its how you install it I always install using admin rights etc and run it as well with admin. Using mse as my avg might be the other thing that could be causing problems is that many users are using different avgs etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Low 41 Posted March 21, 2014 Share Posted March 21, 2014 Framerates were pretty good on my last test flight at EIDW Dublin (both at the airport, and also from the surrounding dense FTX Ireland autogen). For the record, this is the PC that I am running it on..... Intel Core i5 2500k CPU @ 4.3Ghz Gigabyte Z68D-A3 motherboard 8GB DDR3-1600 RAM 1GB GeForce GTX 560Ti SoundBlaster X-Fi Xtreme Music 2TB Hard Disk (FSX and all addons on the same drive) All of my scenery settings are at maximum, apart from water at Mid.2.x AA is set to 8xS SS is set to 2xSGSS AF is set to 16x The flight was performed with the PMDG 737-800NGX, and UT2 AI was set @ 100%. There were a LOT of AI planes active at the airport (many of these have 32bit textures), but the framerates were acceptable to me (I didn't check, but then I never do. I just worry about whether it is controllable or not). I did not encounter any unusual AI issues on either of my two test flighs to date. It should be noted that this was a simple taxi/take off/turn downwind/turn to final/land/taxi test, and that the FSUIPC chime sounded three or four times as I moved back along the taxiway adjacent to runway 28. However, the chime actually stopped as I turned off this taxiway and moved towards the main airport terminal buildings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted March 21, 2014 Aerosoft Share Posted March 21, 2014 Mathijs thanks for your reply. However, i feel that the overall performance of the scenery is lacking behind, other developers. I have been running several high level add-ons, FSDT JFK, LAX, as well as FSDG LGTS etc. and never had a stutter and now your saying "this is obvious the most demanding scenery they have loaded." The ammount of buildings and square meters of JFK and LAX is at least double the amount of DUB. How could it be a specific problem of the user? Still I am disappointed in the quality of the work especially when comparing it to other releases. I hope you could fix these issues soon, at the moment I am an unhappy customer. Have you tried this with version 1.02? I have just installed a new FSX on my laptop that has a far less powerful GPU and a CPU that is just below your i5. I then only inserted the Highmem tweak and installed Dublin. While I will not say it is fast on my laptop, it gets a fine 24 fps average using the default B737 (the only way to test a single product is to keep the rest default, right?). That's less than the 40 to 50 fps on my desktop machine but well in expectations. So your hardware should be perfectly capable of running the scenery. So I would expect an highly tweaked FSX.cfg that ends up working bad with a scenery like this (easy to test, just back it up, delete it and restart FSX), or that you have very limited VAS memory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holi 13 Posted March 21, 2014 Share Posted March 21, 2014 Mathijs, as I´m one of the lucky persons who has no problem with EIDW, it runs smooth and normal AI etc even no problems getting OOM´s running P3Dv2 including ORBX IRE.....and I like it very much but I would like to react the way you answered the topic above. From my point of view it does not make sence what you did as it is simple unrealistic these days! The majority of simmers has tons of addons, quite a lot out of your house, but you are making tests on a virgin FSX installation and refering to that and that is unrealistic!! If one would use your word, one would need to disable all add on sceneries just to make sure to have ie EIDW activated. In these days most of the scenery maker know about problems before they relase the products. You as well know for sure that there a thousands of different computer configurations available which are causing different results. Knowing all this you and your fellows support guys should not point immediately to the customer instead you should look into your product. I´m sure nobody here is posting problems just as fun or insult you!! If somebody is telling you all this and this is happening ONLY in EIDW, you should carefully listen and not pointing back to the customer. This just my general opinion and NO !!! offence as I´m also a loyal customer of AS since long and quite a big number of your products is what I own! The direction your service and customer support is turning, that is what worries me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheyenne Chief Pilot 829 Posted March 21, 2014 Share Posted March 21, 2014 Seems like the good ole rule of thumb has gone: An addon airport, popping up during your approach, adds some 200 MB(+) to your VAS usage. If Aerosoft EIDW X is in the 750 MB range, that pretty much turns Dublin airspace into London airspace: It's like three addon airports (from former times; 3 times 250 MB gives 750 MB = EIDW) popping up at the same time - that's more or less what happens in tight London airspace with a number of addon airports sitting next to each other. If it's possible for Aerosoft to deliver the eye-candy and immersion of three addons in a single product (and, still, for the single price of 25 EUR ), I gladly accept the offer, but I really need to be able to scale down the VAS usage, if needed: There's a requirement for a configuration/'castration' tool as we have been provided with by the Thessaloniki release and its follow-up. (Sorry for repeating myself.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted March 21, 2014 Aerosoft Share Posted March 21, 2014 From my point of view it does not make sence what you did as it is simple unrealistic these days! The majority of simmers has tons of addons, quite a lot out of your house, but you are making tests on a virgin FSX installation and refering to that and that is unrealistic!! Okay, how can you see how heavy a scenery is if you load it in an overloaded FSX? And if we have to test with other add-ons, which do we choose? It would mean you get information like this: FSX SP2 + NGX + Dublin = 35 fps FSX SP2 + NGX + REX + Dublin = 34 fps FSX SP2 + AXE + OPUS + Dublin = 40 fps FSX SP2 + DX1O tweaks + PMDG 777 + OrbX + Dublin + Vatsim = 20 fps FSX SP2 + PMDG 777 + 4 k textures tweaked livery + OrbX + Vatsim + AES + xxx + xxx + xxxx = OOM And we could make hundred of thousands more different combinations. How would that tell you if the scenery is heavy on resources or not? I could create any fps between 50 and 5 with some experimentation. It would proof absolutely nothing. What I now do is use the setting as advised in the manual (in this case all sliders fully right except autogen and water) with the default 737. That way I can see how demanding the product in question is. Just I would test an aircraft over the ocean to remove as much variable as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted March 21, 2014 Aerosoft Share Posted March 21, 2014 Seems like the good ole rule of thumb has gone: An addon airport, popping up during your approach, adds some 200 MB(+) to your VAS usage. That's out of the window indeed. All the scenery products that I have seen in development in the last months go way over that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manuel EBCI 23 Posted March 21, 2014 Share Posted March 21, 2014 Edit.: Volumetric grass seems to be corrupting AI traffic. I did another test. Re-enabled 2048 textures and kept the grass disabled and AI traffic was still crazy. Then I switched textures back to 1024 and enable volumetric grass and the traffic worked fine. It would be useful if you and more people, including Aerosoft team, did the same testing just in order to confirm this or not. Yes Daniel, that's the same for me ... I use EIDW with flag on Off and in 1024 . If I put the grass on "OFF" ... I have also this problem with AI traffic ... Now, again in 1024, I put the grass on " ON " and no problem with AI traffic ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Santoro 77 Posted March 21, 2014 Author Share Posted March 21, 2014 Yes Daniel, that's the same for me ... I use EIDW with flag on Off and in 1024 . If I put the grass on "OFF" ... I have also this problem with AI traffic ... Now, again in 1024, I put the grass on " ON " and no problem with AI traffic ... So let's hope Aerosoft decides do take a look at this. It's clear to me that this is a EIDW issue as I've never had AI traffic messed up anywhere else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_auau 5 Posted March 22, 2014 Share Posted March 22, 2014 Be good to know what the users are using as the a1 package that are having this issue, no issues using ut2 here. Since if it were a eidw issue than everyone would be having this issue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jude 190 Posted March 22, 2014 Share Posted March 22, 2014 I'm using WOAI , Pete. No issues there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.