Author Topic: FSDT KLAX (FS2004) - Textures question  (Read 7866 times)

tlabbe

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
FSDT KLAX (FS2004) - Textures question
« on: October 15, 2011, 07:53:06 am »
Greetings,

I have a few questions regarding the upcoming FS2004 version of KLAX which is under development:

-Will the textures be already converted to DXT3

-Are the textures will be already at 512x512? Or do we have the option of the texture resizer?

This will help out for older configs, with older video cards, for graphics smoothness. This will also help out to eliminate CTD's like g2d.dll for example (if the texture size per .bmp files are too big this can happen)

Thanks in advance, Thierry

-----------------------
My system specs:
ASUS P4C 800 Deluxe motherboard
Intel P4 @ 2.8Ghz
2 GB PC3200 Kingston Hyper-X RAM
BFG Nvidia Geforce 7800GT 512MB w/ latest drivers
300 GB 10K WD Raptor
Creative soundblaster Audigy MP3+

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51452
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: FSDT KLAX (FS2004) - Textures question
« Reply #1 on: October 15, 2011, 11:51:29 am »
-Will the textures be already converted to DXT3

The textures will be in their correct format depending if they need an Alpha channel or not, so their will be either DXT1 or DXT3. There's just a single exception, the texture of the pylons light beams at night is 32 bit, but that's the only one in the whole scenery, and it really needs the 32 bit quality. And it's very small, though.

Quote
Are the textures will be already at 512x512? Or do we have the option of the texture resizer?

Textures will be in their correct sizes depending on what objects their are textured to, we never made a scenery with all textures of the same size. About half of them will be 1024x1024, the rest will be smaller.

The resizer for our previous scenery never touched the textures of smaller size anyway, it only reduced the ones in 1024x1024 to 512x512.

I don't think doing a resizer for KLAX would be a good idea: textures for buildings are already resized from their original 4096x4096 resolution in FSX which, as was explained in other threads, wasn't made to get an "ultra" resolution, but to get more efficiency, by using much less 4096x4096 textures in place of many 1024x1024.

This means, at least for all the buildings, we really can't go lower than 1024x1024.

For the photoreal backround, we remade it in the native 1024x1024 resolution using many textures (about 50 instead of just 4 in FSX), which means the ground resolution it's about the same as in FSX, so we might have a resizer here, but only if we'll find there's some demand for it.

Quote
This will help out for older configs, with older video cards, for graphics smoothness.

Don't think that, just because the scenery is made for FS9, it will run well on lower end systems. Because of the things  FS9 doesn't have, we had to increase its polygonal complexity and lower its texture efficiency, which is why it runs so well under FSX.

- Since FS9 doesn't have shaders, we had to do detail textures both on ground and on buildings by using additional polygons, many thousands more than the FSX version

- Since FS9 doesn't have 4096x4096 textures, we had to remodel things (like the ground) using more textures (less efficient) and more polygons too.

- Since FS9 doesn't support objects larger than a certain amount (the limit is much higher in FSX), we had to get rid of LODs levels, otherwise the objects with LODs wouldn't display under FS9 since a LODed object is larger. The good thing is that, without LODs, there's almost no object pop-up, the bad thing is, the scenery is heavier on the system.

Since the scenery was *designed* from the start without caring how FS9 limitations, it means that, on top of being the most complex port to FS9 we made so far (is taking about a month), it won't have "miracle" frame rates just because "it's for FS9", we would be happy if it would run at least like the FSX version, on the same system.

tlabbe

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: FSDT KLAX (FS2004) - Textures question
« Reply #2 on: October 18, 2011, 01:11:16 am »
Hello Umberto,
First of all a big thank you for providing such a detailed and elaborated answer, I really appreciate it.

If I want to run a base of comparison here, let's say between KLAX for FS9 and KDFW 1.0.3, so far I have no issues running this scenery on my system. I get around 15-25 fps while on the ground taxiing.

The question is, based on the techniques used on KLAX for FS9 and KDFW, will I get around the same result or will I struggle a bit more to run the scenery? This will be interesting to see. I noticed in the \texture folder of KDFW 1.0.3 the biggest size of BMP files are around 1,366kb and mostly all other BMPs are around 683kb. So if KLAX will be optimized in this fashion for running FS9, maybe keeping the bmp around these levels it would help alot, don't know if it's feasible, I have no experience in scenery modeling....

thanks again and regards, Thierry

-----------------------
My system specs:
ASUS P4C 800 Deluxe motherboard
Intel P4 @ 2.8Ghz
2 GB PC3200 Kingston Hyper-X RAM
BFG Nvidia Geforce 7800GT 512MB w/ latest drivers
300 GB 10K WD Raptor
Creative soundblaster Audigy MP3+

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51452
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: FSDT KLAX (FS2004) - Textures question
« Reply #3 on: October 18, 2011, 10:20:17 am »
Quote
The question is, based on the techniques used on KLAX for FS9 and KDFW, will I get around the same result or will I struggle a bit more to run the scenery? This will be interesting to see.

I'm afraid KLAX will be slower than KDFW.

Quote
I noticed in the \texture folder of KDFW 1.0.3 the biggest size of BMP files are around 1,366kb and mostly all other BMPs are around 683kb.

That's only the difference between DXT3 and DXT1 textures, but they are both 1024x1024. Choosing between DXT3 and DXT1 it's not really a choice: if a textures needs an Alpha channel, it *has* to be DXT3.

About the size, we really can't go lower than 1024x1024 in FS9 because, at this size, they are already resized 4x comparing to the FSX version but, as I've said, we didn't use the 4096x4096 texture size for resolution in FSX, we used it for SPEED so, overall, the resolution in FSX it's exactly the same as if we used 1024x1024 texture, it's just that (being 16x larger) we used 16x LESS of them.

Since FS9 doesn't support them, and in order to remodel all the buildings, we would probably have to work 6 months to re-texture everything (there would be no FS9 version under those conditions), we simply resized them at 1024x1024, so they are still compatible with the original modules, just more blurred. The only exception to this is the ground, which has been remodeled entirely.

You just have to accept the fact that, in order to run KLAX on FS9, you'll have to use a system that would be capable to run it in FSX too.

precious62b

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: FSDT KLAX (FS2004) - Textures question
« Reply #4 on: October 18, 2011, 03:24:54 pm »
Would the FPS be comparable to the Cloud9 version with the same system?

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51452
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: FSDT KLAX (FS2004) - Textures question
« Reply #5 on: October 19, 2011, 10:04:33 am »
Would the FPS be comparable to the Cloud9 version with the same system?

Way slower, but of course it will look better too.

I'm sorry guys but now, after working for a month at the KLAX port for FS9, I'm even more convinced that FS9 is dead and has no future whatsoever, since its aging engine just can't withstand what we are doing right now.

cmpbllsjc

  • Beta tester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 948
Re: FSDT KLAX (FS2004) - Textures question
« Reply #6 on: October 19, 2011, 01:51:21 pm »
I'm sorry guys but now, after working for a month at the KLAX port for FS9, I'm even more convinced that FS9 is dead and has no future whatsoever, since its aging engine just can't withstand what we are doing right now.

It sounds like you just stuck a dagger in the chest of FS9 users, although at some point its impossible to keep on developing for an older platform that requires to much work to back port and wont end up yielding the same quality of looks and performance you strive to achieve.

Dimon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 493
Re: FSDT KLAX (FS2004) - Textures question
« Reply #7 on: October 19, 2011, 02:16:01 pm »
No problem, we can wait until MF shows up. ;D

For now, another open platform (for MOD developers I mean) is coming which, perhaps, makes me to pause a bit on FlightSimming.

[ Invalid YouTube link ]
« Last Edit: October 19, 2011, 02:17:33 pm by Dimon »
i7-6700k@4.6Ghz, Z170 Delux, 980Ti-6GB5700, 2TB EVO850, 16GB DDR4 RAM Win7/64 PRO.

Rafal

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
Re: FSDT KLAX (FS2004) - Textures question
« Reply #8 on: October 19, 2011, 10:15:55 pm »
you just stuck a dagger in the chest of FS9 users

Not really, at least not in my case.  ;)

There are too many FS9 users around, too many existing quality addons for this platform (way more than for FSX) and too much money invested to say it is dead in any way.
I respect Umberto's opinion, especially that I am a great fan of FSDT (I have their four airports), but due to the above words and the fact there still are developers releasing and updating FS9 sceneries, aircraft and various tools, I am not even close to being afraid of FS9 death of any disease. Moreover, what does 'dead' mean in this case? In my eyes it will live as long as I enjoy using it, together with a large community of passionate simmers, even if folks do not make any more addons for it (but, again, some do and I am sure they will).

And, of course, I will buy LAX and live with the fact it will be FSDT's last FS9 product.
I feel very positive about everything about FSDT and it will never change.

PS And the reason I have been here everyday lately is checking if KLAX for FS9 is out!  ;D
Still patiently waiting for the announced Zurich update too. I am so excited about it. It is one of my all times' favourite sceneries.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2011, 10:57:03 pm by Rafal »
i7 7700k 4.2GHz, GTX 1080Ti, Asus MAXIMUS 9 FORMULA, 32 GB RAM DDR4, WD40EFRX 4TB, SSD 850 EVO 1TB, SSD 850 EVO 250GB, LG 34UM68-P 34" ultrawide monitor, Windows 10 Pro 64-bit, MSFS2020