Could FSX Compiler make a FS9 model??

[Mathias]

There's something seriously going wrong with your textures, that's for sure.

 

[lucas81]

I will check it tomorrow. But it may be default FSX landclass. Aces put additional vector drawn scenery (look at the gold courses) which does not fit the default, desert one (because there is no desert-like golf course texture in the FSX, only the grassy one ) . The default scenery is of course totally messed. FSX adds new regionalisations, but the default landclass is mostly hopeless. Squre-like cities, desert cities (textures taken from the Mediterrean region) in the middle of the Europe (this is how my country looks like on the default FSX), the same vector drawn data as it was in the FS8/FS9 (the USA, Canada, Western Europe, Japan, OZ have much better one). The good thing is the mesh has been improved (38 meter and 76 meter for some part of the World)

Bill, I can recommend you Cloud9's landclass for the different parts of the world. It costs 10$ each and it is worth the money very much. Iam using Asia/Africa, USA and Europe (which extends my landclass from the Ultimate Terrain X)

Sorry for small OT.

 

[Roger]

This is what I see when I fly in Phoenix. No grass around a desert airport, and not grass on the mountains. (or golf courses).

I think the world of FSX. Not bashing it. I just cant handle the scenery. Thats all Im saying. I would think England looks far far better then my dusty ole Phoenix Arizona with our dried out shrubberies and cactii...

:ernae:


Bill

Looks bizare Bill,
Doesn't look anything like my Arizona??

 

[n4gix]

So I guess for a personal motive, I make FS9 models as well as FSX models, creating the FSX model second after the refinements are finished on the FS9 model.

Bill, I've found that it's far faster and easier to develop the FSX version first, then "downconvert" the model to FS9 standards... :ernae:

 

[LonelyplanetXO]

I might be wrong but I think what Bill's saying is that because he prefers FS9 he develops the model for himself first then when he's happy with it, out of consideration for other users he creates an FSX version. If you consider that he develops firstly for pleasure and secondly for commercial reasons, that makes sense.
At the risk of being out of step - I appreciate this is the FSX forum; I'm with Bill. I have both + Accelleration plus a fast PC, but just plain old prefer FS9. I still buy addons as do many FS9'ers, so clearly there's still a market.

LPXO

 

[Cazzie]

I might be wrong but I think what Bill's saying is that because he prefers FS9 he develops the model for himself first then when he's happy with it, out of consideration for other users he creates an FSX version. If you consider that he develops firstly for pleasure and secondly for commercial reasons, that makes sense.
At the risk of being out of step - I appreciate this is the FSX forum; I'm with Bill. I have both + Accelleration plus a fast PC, but just plain old prefer FS9. I still buy addons as do many FS9'ers, so clearly there's still a market.

LPXO

You bet your bippie there's a market. But I am fairly well satisfied with all the land mass and payware I have purchased over the years for FS9, so now I have started getting those aircraft for it I have put off for so long.

I still love the consistent life-like frame rate in FS9 too and I know exactly where I am in the USA, something that FSX confuses me with it's false textures, even with GEX-USA and UTX-USA installed. FSX needs ground textures and "real" landclass real bad.

Caz

 

[FAC257]

Lionheart

Phoenix shouldn't look that bleak. That would be depressing.

Here's the same shot, same airport with UTX-US & FSG US Landclass working together.