FS9 support > Las Vegas FS9
My Afcad, visible markers, texture alpha layers
virtuali:
--- Quote from: harpsi on April 25, 2009, 04:11:39 pm ---I changed all taxi widths. Maybe that is not my latest file... And I don´t have default hold short marks as well...
--- End quote ---
Keep in mind that you don't have to change all the widths to 1 ft, just the ones connected to an hold short node.
harpsi:
--- Quote from: virtuali on April 25, 2009, 04:45:33 pm ---
--- Quote from: harpsi on April 25, 2009, 04:11:39 pm ---I changed all taxi widths. Maybe that is not my latest file... And I don´t have default hold short marks as well...
--- End quote ---
Keep in mind that you don't have to change all the widths to 1 ft, just the ones connected to an hold short node.
--- End quote ---
It is exactly in the opposite way. I changed all of them from 1 to 100 and not the opposite. I don´t have any problem with the scenery, and also with AI traffic as well after those changes.
harpsi
virtuali:
--- Quote from: harpsi on April 25, 2009, 04:54:53 pm ---It is exactly in the opposite way. I changed all of them from 1 to 100 and not the opposite. I don´t have any problem with the scenery, and also with AI traffic as well after those changes.
--- End quote ---
I see double hold short zones with your AFCAD, if I don't change those links to 1 ft. And this is what is supposed to happen. I don't see any difference with AI behaviour, regardless of the width.
harpsi:
Hi
In my original afcad: width of 1 feet = to NO traffic! That´s why I changed this from the beginning: AI traffic return and no problems with scenery and AI traffic behaviour after that...
harpsi
Mike...:
Never test AI at a rate other than 1x. But anyway, you're obviously not seeing anything, so it doesn't really matter.
--- Quote ---We are fixing everything that has reported so far: in fact, most of the fixes ARE for FS9 and, of course, the AFCAD will be finished shortly so, what you are saying that we are not fixing even the slightest for FS9, is obviously wrong.
--- End quote ---
I never said such a thing, read again and please differentiate between fixing things after the release and doing a proper release in the first place.
--- Quote ---Wrong again. The Trial is there in there open. There's nothing to hide.
--- End quote ---
Just because you see the word "hide" in a sentence, doesn't mean it suggests that you have something to hide. That's the problem, you're not hiding anything, you're not being very subtle... What I meant, was that everytime someone brings up something, sometimes a genuine problem, sometimes a side effect, you say, we have a trial. Having a trial is not a deus ex machina.
--- Quote ---And you are not doing any favors to the FS9 cause, by commenting in such way, because it's post like these that really makes you wonder if all this hassle is really worth it...if supporting FS9 would start to become a burden, we'll very well decide to release 2 FSX sceneries in the same time it takes to relase an FSX scenery + an FS9 scenery properly done.
--- End quote ---
You already aren't doing the FS9 version properly, as you've stated MANY TIMES, it's a direct port with no extra effort ("EXACTLY the same"). So dropping FS9 now shouldn't give you time to do two FSX sceneries instead of one, should it?
Really, if it is such a burden, then just say thanks to the 45%, but no thanks.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version