As these are all internal sim settings I did not think effected the max external objects.
I think that, when the max Simobject limit is hit, is triggering some kind of bug in the sim, which results in Simconnect not responding correctly anymore, which means that basically no add-on using it will work correctly.
Just yesterday I spent several hours together with the other GSX developer, trying to replicate your issue (without using any AI Injection, so we were quite sure the max Simobject limit wasn't hit) and, no matter which foul combinations of entering/exiting VR in every possible situation, ever resulted in a loss of the menu, the toolbar or any other issue.
Tried entering VR on the Main menu, no issues.
Tried entering VR after the flight started, no issues.
Tried opening the GSX menu, and entering VR with the menu open, no issue, the menu just reopened.
Tried opening the GSX menu, letting it timeout without choosing anything, no issue, the menu just reopened entering VR
Tried entering/exiting VR by keep pressing CTRL+TAB multiple times, as fast as possible, no issues.
Tried pressing the GSX hotkey as fast as possible, no issue, the menu just open, closes, open again, closes, as expected.
So, after hours of testing, we were never be able to replicate ANY problem related to VR, so our conclusion was the only possible reason for this, is some kind of Simconnect problem, as if Simconnect stopped to call back our code, as it's supposed to.
Could you kindly explain what the max objects comprises of and internal sim settings that contribute to it.
Any Simobjects counts to reach the limit. AI airplanes, Ground vehicles servicing AI, GSX Ground vehicles servicing the User, Jetways, static Simobjects placed by the scenery itself, everything can contribute to reach the limit.
I was only aware of it due to a post by FSTL commenting on the extra clutter setting in GSX giving them headaches . Thank you for your support but from what I have seen and some of posts I have read suggests people may be having similar issues without realising what is going on and blaming your software.
Historically, there has been a tendency to blame the software that has been released last.
For example, when we released new airports in P3D (especially in 32 bit), users that were already very close to memory exhaustion because of all the other stuff the installed before, from memory-hungry planes to more detailed background sceneries, blamed our airports to "cause" a CTD, saying it was our duty to "optimize" the airport to be sure it would run in *every* possible combination of installed add-ons, regardless of those add-on already took almost all the available memory.
I don't obviously agree to this view, and it's just wrong putting the blame on the newest released software: if you are exhausting your resources, it's always because of a COMBINATION of multiple add-on, each one consuming some, not a single one should be "blamed", and I'm saying this even when in this case, we were the ones releasing first.
In the end this is an issue for Asobo to rectify but I need more in depth knowledge to raise this as a fault. Never seen any bug reports before.
Of course it is, and I'm sure the max Simobject limit ( which has now been recently documented to be 1000 ) must be some legacy setting inherited when that limit seemed impossible to reach, because you would have ended your RAM/VRAM well before you reached that limit in FSX or P3D.
However, the way MSFS is done, that encourages and in some case even enforces objects to be more optimized with multiple LODs ( at least ours surely are ), and the fact it's possible ( only after SU9 ) to create composite objects made of multiple sub-objects, makes the limit easier to reach, before you are hitting into actual performance issues, because you might very well have 1100 objects in MSFS, not necessarily taking more memory or causing fps issue than 500 objects in FSX or P3D so yes, I think that limit should be lifted.
And yes, there are reports about it, both on the Microsoft Flight sim users forum, but also on Asobo Devs forum.
