Right, GEP from looking at the texture, organizes the houses and trees to look more of a "Metropolis" look, as well as adds a few more colors, and enhances the green effect of green lawns, and so on.
Which, exactly as I've said, doesn't have anything to do with MESH.
Still couldn't re-create this. I turned shadows on, and flew a over the FSDT Runway, shadows are still visible
First, as I've said, not ALL FSDT airports requires to turn Shadows OFF. And, you still not getting it: it's not the Shadow that will disappear, it's the WHOLE airplane that will disappear, but ONLY on some airports. Zurich, for example, is one that surely need that option turned off. And, ONLY for FS9 AI models.
The "VTP" Terrain just repeats itself in a city metropolis, and it changes when it gets to a downtown area, but otherwise it just stays the same, it's not really real world based.
Sorry, no. That's would be Autogen + Landclass. You mentioned roads, and roads doesn't have anything to do with Autogen, either if they are VTP terrain or if they are embedded in the ground texture, no Autogen setting will affect roads in any way. And no, VTP IS based on real world data, and it's NOT "repeats" itself.
VTP is what products like Ultimate Terrain improve but, you are probably confusing it with Autogen and Landclasses because those products usually come with their own Landclasses and Autogen definition, but that doesn't have anything to do with VTP or it means in any way that VTP is repeating or not based on real-world data.
Which is why it puts more load on my game, and slows it down dramatically when I use FSX, but, again, it's all about hardware.
Which is exactly why I've said that you can turn it down a bit, and still get a denser scenery than FS9.
[qute]FSDT Sceneries are debatable, as they are more complex than most sceneries. [/quote]
You said your FSX is already slow without any addons so, you can't obviously expect a more detailed scenery would increase that...and, since FSX is NOT slow without any addons, it clearly means your settings are probably set too high, or set wrong, or you system is not properly optimized, all things that, considering what you said in this thread, seems to be very likely.
But yet, I get slower response time from Blueprint Sceneries, but FSDT graphics just seem to give up once they are put on overload, and Blueprint sceneries do not.
"just seem to give up" is not really very clear. If you mean the fps degrades over time, that's clearly not a problem of our sceneries but, most likely, the progressive addition of more and more AI that appear, since AI traffic can take several minutes to fill up and, since you are using FS9 models in FSX, it's very likely your main performance problem it's the AIs, not the scenery.
OF COURSE, if you use the same AI over a way less detailed scenery, it's fairly normal the OVERALL load of you system would be less.
Right. Please clarify of what you mean "engine" is, but they do not talk about frames.
An 3d engine is anything that can drive 3d images on screen, any 3d game must use one, many use the Unreal engine, other the Crysis engine, the Source engine, etc. FSX uses its own engine made by Microsoft, which is an evolution of the FS9 engine, but it's an engine nonetheless so, it can be evaluated just like any other game.
If you want to know how fast/powerful an engine is, you never discuss fps, but only polygons/sec, since fps doesn't tell much, without knowing how complex the scene being rendered it. Of course, graphic settings in FSX are there just to allow user to DECIDE how complex the scene should be, just like any other game out there.
