• Announcements

    • turbofandude

      Proper Problem Reporting for the TFDi Design 717   07/09/2017

      Folks, As the user count is increasing, it is becoming more of a task for us to stay on top of problem reports. We are also receiving an increasing amount of incomplete reports that we are unable to follow up on (which frustrates everyone, us included). On that note, we are going to be enforcing a stricter formal problem reporting system. There are a few main points that need to be addressed. ALL problem reports must be submitted via the Bugs and Suggestions system. Open discussion on the forums is fine, but our team simply cannot respond to every single comment (especially when the majority of doing so is asking for information the Bugs and Suggestions system already asks for). Incomplete reports will be ignored. This means reports like "my FPS is bad" will not be given weight. This isn't because we don't care. It is because a report like that does absolutely nothing for anyone - we can't fix it based on that. Please include EVERYTHING you can possibly think of regarding the problem and take as many steps as you can to isolate it. Prepar3D v4, despite what you have heard, can still be unstable. Yes, it is definitely possible to fly flights without issues. But it is still relatively new, as are most of the addons available for it. Please refrain from attacking us or other developers because of this. We have already had one scenario where a 717 CTD was resolved by an update to Prepar3D itself. This is likely not the only time that will be the case. You are still free to report the crashes, as it may help whoever the developers of the faulting code are solve the issue. Duplicate reports will be deleted/merged. For the sake of sanity for us trying to prioritize and evaluate issues, if we discover multiple reports of the same thing, we may merge/delete the duplicates. We strongly encourage you to search and see if your problem has been reported before. Thank you all in advance. This may seem overbearing, but this is the only way we are going to be able to stay on top and continue heading in the direction we, and the community, want.
turbofandude

Night Lighting Changes

Night Lighting Options  

70 members have voted

  1. 1. How should we proceed with the night lighting?

    • Keep the current lighting (darker/not functional during day but less blotchy)
      19
    • Use the new lighting (more blotchy but brighter and functional during the day)
      43


Recommended Posts

In order for us to allow night lighting to work during the day and to brighten up the cockpit at night, we have to switch to a different blending mode. That blending mode accomplishes those two goals but at the cost of the night lighting textures appearing more blotchy. I've attached a few screenshots of it - please let us know how you want us to proceed.

59c64853dae3052ad4374dbd3c5c27d7.jpg

10ad9708a85bba7e173bf5ac27d039b6.jpg

94556931e31740b204586ac39f540484.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TimS   

Have you thought about integrating the FSLABS Spotlights lighting engine? I know it means another product to buy for the customers, perhaps it could be made an optional choice for those who want it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you really investigated all options available? How are other solutions being implemented and addressed for the same scenario.

How have others got it right and you are still fumbling around indicating that only two options are available and it's a F_ing compromise. Start thinking out of the box and implement alternatives. It's very kind of you to offer to patrons options but, clearly this forgoes future fixes by simply choosing A or B.  

It was not stated in the marketing or purchasing of this product that it was an unfinished product that the producers would gladly take your money and offer compromises to achieve a rather poor result . This is not going to garner favorable confidence and future purchases of your products. I hasten to say buyer beware when it comes to your products and  now its up to the team to realize that a testing program of greater scope must be implemented to ensure quality of product. If this was a real plane ...well of course it would be grounded. I was very enthusiastic about making this purchase because this type of aircraft suits my flying style. I'm also waiting for the CJR 900, we all know how long the development of that has been but, I've no doubt that it will be complete and fully functional right out of the box. If you want to fly with the big boys start thinking like them cause turkeys are grounded!

Advice....Call the guys at Majestic.

Edited by AluminumClouds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
foobar   
1 hour ago, AluminumClouds said:

Have you really investigated all options available? How are other solutions being implemented and addressed for the same scenario.

How have others got it right and you are still fumbling around indicating that only two options are available and it's a F_ing compromise. Start thinking out of the box and implement alternatives. It's very kind of you to offer to patrons options but, clearly this forgoes future fixes by simply choosing A or B.  

It was not stated in the marketing or purchasing of this product that it was an unfinished product that the producers would gladly take your money and offer compromises to achieve a rather poor result . This is not going to garner favorable confidence and future purchases of your products. I hasten to say buyer beware when it comes to your products and  now its up to the team realize that a testing program of greater scope must be implemented to ensure quality of product. If this was a real plane ...well of course it would be grounded. I was very enthusiastic about making this purchase because this type of aircraft suit my flying style. I'm also waiting for the CJR 900, we all know how long the development of that has been but I've no doubt that it will be complete and fully functional right out of the box. If you want to fly with the big boys start thinking like them cause turkeys are grounded!

Advice....Call the guys at Majestic.

If you are also interested in the crj from Aerosoft, just have a look on what they say about lighting and night textures. It seems to be a pain in the *** to work with an old engine as FSX or P3D < 3.
The crj will only have a on/off dome light, it's also a compromise.

Anyway some workarounds seem to work (like one from Majestic) but I don't understand why the lighting system from Milviz does not work beautifully with the 717 (it work perfectly with their king air). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Novej   
19 hours ago, turbofandude said:

In order for us to allow night lighting to work during the day and to brighten up the cockpit at night, we have to switch to a different blending mode. That blending mode accomplishes those two goals but at the cost of the night lighting textures appearing more blotchy. I've attached a few screenshots of it - please let us know how you want us to proceed.

59c64853dae3052ad4374dbd3c5c27d7.jpg

10ad9708a85bba7e173bf5ac27d039b6.jpg

94556931e31740b204586ac39f540484.jpg

Is this a temporary fix? Or is this the actual no kidding lighting fix? I really like the current lights. I just dont like that they don't work at dawn or dusk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
foobar   

Basics things like Carenado or Aerosoft is ok. Panel and dome on/off based on night texturing is not on the top but it's enough. The render is acceptable.
More complex system like Milviz, Majestic or FSLab is better.
I do understand that you will no develop something amazing like FSLab (60 euros VS 170 euros...) but why do you not tweak the Milviz one?
Currently, the problem is that the rendering is crap because we do not see any light source, you implement only spot light, no ambiant ones... etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
foobar   

@MVJB @turbofandude

Sorry I'm coming from Xplane, which uses a modern engine managing lights, I'm not an FSX developper so it's difficult to understand (but I know that is so boring on p3d/fsx witch use a 20 year old engine...)
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@foobar We hate it just as much - we fight to get average lighting at best, then we look at what things like Unreal or Frostbite can do in real time and it makes me sad, comparatively. The problem is a complex mixture of headaches all across the board (us, the sim, the lighting system, everything).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
foobar   
2 minutes ago, turbofandude said:

@foobar We hate it just as much - we fight to get average lighting at best, then we look at what things like Unreal or Frostbite can do in real time and it makes me sad, comparatively. The problem is a complex mixture of headaches all across the board (us, the sim, the lighting system, everything).

ahah anyway good luck. try to make the best but we know that is a pain in the *** and we keep in mind that it's 60 bucks product. So stay focus on features and fixes for the next release :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kdfw   

no, those screen shots look like 12 bit RGB, totally retro and a step back.

you have 2 options:

1) keep what you have now and just add the vc light fx file to use as a flood lights in dawn/dusk.  there is no crappy image quality, just need to turn on flood lights when it's getting dark.  this is what most non-high end addons do.  

2) license fsl spotlights.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odourboy   

IMHO, you've got to address the lack of VC lighting for dawn/dusk situation. If that means some blotchy panels, so be it. It's not that bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mad_X   

Licensing spotlights and give it to all existing customers for free with this product would be the least after letting us buy an alpha version of the plane. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, socaltxwa86 said:

I noticed many mentioning FSLabs Spotlights in this thread. I seem to recall that several people have had stability issues running Spotlights and the TFDI 717.

Indeed - it has caused crashes before, which I'll attribute to likely a clash of how our current night lighting/gauge rendering works and their code.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Driver8   

Just curious - can any of the image files be grayscaled and/or dithered to help reduce that blotchy look?  I like more functional night lighting but that's kinda a rough tradeoff as it is :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Driver8 said:

Just curious - can any of the image files be grayscaled and/or dithered to help reduce that blotchy look?  I like more functional night lighting but that's kinda a rough tradeoff as it is :) 

We're going to continue looking at ways to improve, for sure. Dithering does help some, so what you see there may not exactly be what gets released. I'm not happy with that as a permanent solution, either, but it solves the functionality issues, at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kdfw   

fsl spotlights work just fine with the existing milviz lighting gauge.  

here's a video of the spotlights with the 717.  no blotchy pixilated mess.  

if you want to do this vc justice, i'd suggest contacting fsl and see what it takes to license this technology.  

since the images are dark, watch in hd and full screen.

 

 

Edited by kdfw
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kymh   

Meant to say thanks for this post KDFW.

I purchased after seeing your video and love it for so many different aircraft not just the 717-200 (which sits on the shelf regardless until I can save/load a flight plan due to all the crashes).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.