-
Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:
- Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
- Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
- Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
- Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
- Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
- Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.
Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.
By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.
Fsds3
- Thread starter ahuimanu
- Start date
- Messages
- 34,453
- Country
Hi,
I think it is good to see that more tools are being updated to follow the Fs2004 techniques. Until now GMax was the only option when you wanted to design using the Fs2004 standard. Especially for a lot of designers who are used to FSDS this might be a big plus.
But personally, I don't think it will very atractive for current GMax users. I don't expect the new FSDS to work just as powerfull as GMax does. I have used FSDS1 and FSDS2 in the past, but I wouldn't want to switch back from GMax to them anymore. Creating models with the boolean, extrude options is just so much easier. And also the mapping of the textures on your model I find a lot easier to do. But who knows, maybe the new FSDS3 will surprise me when released
.
I don't think the recent uncertainties about GMax matter much. FSDS3 also depends on MakeMDL from GMax. So either with using GMax or FSDS3 we can make the same format. At the moment GMax is still working fine, the only uncertainty with GMax is for future FS version. But as FSDS3 now depends on the same exporting tools (MakeMDL) it is just as uncertain how it will work with future versions of FS.
Just my
I think it is good to see that more tools are being updated to follow the Fs2004 techniques. Until now GMax was the only option when you wanted to design using the Fs2004 standard. Especially for a lot of designers who are used to FSDS this might be a big plus.
But personally, I don't think it will very atractive for current GMax users. I don't expect the new FSDS to work just as powerfull as GMax does. I have used FSDS1 and FSDS2 in the past, but I wouldn't want to switch back from GMax to them anymore. Creating models with the boolean, extrude options is just so much easier. And also the mapping of the textures on your model I find a lot easier to do. But who knows, maybe the new FSDS3 will surprise me when released
.I don't think the recent uncertainties about GMax matter much. FSDS3 also depends on MakeMDL from GMax. So either with using GMax or FSDS3 we can make the same format. At the moment GMax is still working fine, the only uncertainty with GMax is for future FS version. But as FSDS3 now depends on the same exporting tools (MakeMDL) it is just as uncertain how it will work with future versions of FS.
Just my
- Messages
- 147
- Country
Having climbed (partially) the gmax learning curve I tend to agree with Arno. However, I find it comforting to know that a viable alternative now (soon) exists. (I guess 3ds or the like is beyond what most of us are prepared to invest in our hobby). From the description on the Abacus site FSDS3 seems pretty powerful, it features boolean operations and an abilty to export in x.file format.
I shall stick with gmax for now, though.
Peter
I shall stick with gmax for now, though.
Peter
It seems to me that all we have in fsdsv3 is an attempt to acheive what gmax already has done. In fsds case, the cost is ~$40 usd. Gmax is free.
Both are subject to the same future uncertainty.
No gain from my perspective, unless the user interface of fsds is important to a given user, and they've been wanting to return to it.
Bob
Both are subject to the same future uncertainty.
No gain from my perspective, unless the user interface of fsds is important to a given user, and they've been wanting to return to it.
Bob
Although I've always promoted GMAX, and I'm more than happy to continue to use it, I have had a lot of feedback from people who see FSDS3 as their entry back into serious scenery design. I'll wait and see if all this eventuates, though.
I've always thought that you need to do some serious study and lots of work to do effective scenery design, and that those who thought GMAX was too hard may not find FSDS much easier.
If you want effective, unique and imaginative results then you can't really use quick, ez-tools.
On the other hand, I've fallen in love with EZ Scenery, so if FSDS offered similar ease of use, it may revolutionise scenery design.
The best thing about EZ Scenery is that when I'm engrossed in laying down a section of fence in the sim, it's nice to take a moment to watch an aircraft come in to land. Maybe one day I'll be able to design objects directly in the sim
-Robin
I've always thought that you need to do some serious study and lots of work to do effective scenery design, and that those who thought GMAX was too hard may not find FSDS much easier.
If you want effective, unique and imaginative results then you can't really use quick, ez-tools.
On the other hand, I've fallen in love with EZ Scenery, so if FSDS offered similar ease of use, it may revolutionise scenery design.
The best thing about EZ Scenery is that when I'm engrossed in laying down a section of fence in the sim, it's nice to take a moment to watch an aircraft come in to land. Maybe one day I'll be able to design objects directly in the sim
-Robin
I have started with an aircraft model (as that is what I really bought this for - scenery as a close second) and things are going okay so far.
The method for creating a tube to correspond to background guide photo is great. Also, editing cross sections works well. However, I have come to the prickly pear of modeling the cockpit (737-500 - common, sure, but why not as an exercise?). I create an outline of the front windows and then use the templating tools to extrude this outline out to a 3-d rectangular object. The problem is that this object won't close, thus making the boolean operation fail.
The boolean operations seem to be handled by a seperate MFC/C++ program and it sometimes chokes. It likes when you skewer the model straight across, but when I tried to create both front cockpit windows with a mirrored skewering tool, the program choked. It also chokes when you try to use a 3-d object from the templating tool.
So, it seems that there are a few bumps so far, but I REALLY like the interface better as it seems to be far more limited to JUST items that are FS-related.
I really wish that there was a dedicated forum for the product over at abacus (or somewhere). There seems to be a site dedicated to the program (http://www.fsdesignstudio.com/) but there's not forum there and the site doesn't seem to remain updated.
So far, this program is doing what I hoped it would - it has reinvigorated my desire to do fs add-on designs.
My next problem is getting better at the cockpit to fuselage transitions.
The method for creating a tube to correspond to background guide photo is great. Also, editing cross sections works well. However, I have come to the prickly pear of modeling the cockpit (737-500 - common, sure, but why not as an exercise?). I create an outline of the front windows and then use the templating tools to extrude this outline out to a 3-d rectangular object. The problem is that this object won't close, thus making the boolean operation fail.
The boolean operations seem to be handled by a seperate MFC/C++ program and it sometimes chokes. It likes when you skewer the model straight across, but when I tried to create both front cockpit windows with a mirrored skewering tool, the program choked. It also chokes when you try to use a 3-d object from the templating tool.
So, it seems that there are a few bumps so far, but I REALLY like the interface better as it seems to be far more limited to JUST items that are FS-related.
I really wish that there was a dedicated forum for the product over at abacus (or somewhere). There seems to be a site dedicated to the program (http://www.fsdesignstudio.com/) but there's not forum there and the site doesn't seem to remain updated.
So far, this program is doing what I hoped it would - it has reinvigorated my desire to do fs add-on designs.
My next problem is getting better at the cockpit to fuselage transitions.
ahuimanu
HI just a heads up on a site for you . there is a forum on EZ_Scenery and they are also taking in FSDS-3.
Take a look anyhow and maybe you may fine what you are looking for.
http://www.flightsim-bevs.com/smf_1-0-5/index.php?
Woody
HI just a heads up on a site for you . there is a forum on EZ_Scenery and they are also taking in FSDS-3.
Take a look anyhow and maybe you may fine what you are looking for.
http://www.flightsim-bevs.com/smf_1-0-5/index.php?
Woody
- Messages
- 214
- Country
Well that would be a big mistake from a marketing
point of view. I think it is about 2 months since
the
with GMAX.
Surely someone with a bit of business acumen
would have seen a golden opportunity arising from
the GMAX problems.
All those hapless souls out there with half finished
projects are unlikely to purchase FSDS-3 and
start again .
point of view. I think it is about 2 months since
the
with GMAX.Surely someone with a bit of business acumen
would have seen a golden opportunity arising from
the GMAX problems.
All those hapless souls out there with half finished
projects are unlikely to purchase FSDS-3 and
start again .
Last edited:
If you want more control over MakeMDL when you export as a BGL file, either rename or del the following two files.
MakeMdlAircraftParms.txt
MakeMdlSceneryParms.txt
They are just a command " /BATCH " wich tells MakeMDL to get on with the job , this was a decision from the publisher that wanted to keep the export function simple.
By removing or renaming the two files to a .BAK extension allows you to add things like Dicks KillShadow X file or to force it to keep the source files.
Luis is at the moment looking into adding the HardSurface command from the MakeMDL SDK and also the attachpoint function that is common in Gmax.
This info is from one of the major beta testers that was involved in both testing and development who is now able to comment on some subjects as the Non Disclosure Agreement has now finished due to the release of the product.
rgds Jeff
MakeMdlAircraftParms.txt
MakeMdlSceneryParms.txt
They are just a command " /BATCH " wich tells MakeMDL to get on with the job , this was a decision from the publisher that wanted to keep the export function simple.
By removing or renaming the two files to a .BAK extension allows you to add things like Dicks KillShadow X file or to force it to keep the source files.
Luis is at the moment looking into adding the HardSurface command from the MakeMDL SDK and also the attachpoint function that is common in Gmax.
This info is from one of the major beta testers that was involved in both testing and development who is now able to comment on some subjects as the Non Disclosure Agreement has now finished due to the release of the product.
rgds Jeff
- Messages
- 34,453
- Country
Hi,
But why would I want to drop at the moment? Until MS released the next version of FS we are sure that GMax works fine. After that we can't be sure. But we can't be sure if FSDS3 will work fine for that next version as well at the moment, as it uses the same plugin as GMax to create the object files.
So I don't think many GMax users are currently waiting for FSDS3, it is a more a nice tool for people who want to design FS scenery using the FS2004 format and could not get used to GMax by now.
Also, the more complex import/export options you are going to add, the more work it will probably take to code the tool. And I am sure that you will notice that in the price. That could also be bad for the marketing
.
Tasmanet said:Well that would be a big mistake from a marketing point of view. I think it is about 2 months since the
All those hapless souls out there with half finished projects are unlikely to purchase FSDS-3 and start again .
But why would I want to drop at the moment? Until MS released the next version of FS we are sure that GMax works fine. After that we can't be sure. But we can't be sure if FSDS3 will work fine for that next version as well at the moment, as it uses the same plugin as GMax to create the object files.
So I don't think many GMax users are currently waiting for FSDS3, it is a more a nice tool for people who want to design FS scenery using the FS2004 format and could not get used to GMax by now.
Also, the more complex import/export options you are going to add, the more work it will probably take to code the tool. And I am sure that you will notice that in the price. That could also be bad for the marketing
.
- Messages
- 34,453
- Country
ahuimanu said:
At the site BirdsEyeView they have created an unofficial website for EZ-Scenery and there are also some FSDS3 questions there:
http://www.flightsim-bevs.com/smf_1-0-5/index.php#15
And you are welcome to use this forum of course
. Although you will mainly find scenery designers here and not that many aircraft designers.Tasmanet, wouldn't you agree that I would easily know what I'm aware of?
My comment was:
<<Tasmanet, therre are no "hapless souls" I"m aware of due to the decisions re gmax >>
Any hapless souls that I'm NOT aware of have not presented themselves to me. Thus....there are no hapless souls I'm aware of. Seems simple.
Now, the logic of why I say that is that Gmax works great. The business decisions made recently did not change the functionality of gmax. No users are inconvenienced. Future inconvenience is unknown for both tools.
Cheers,
Bob
My comment was:
<<Tasmanet, therre are no "hapless souls" I"m aware of due to the decisions re gmax >>
Any hapless souls that I'm NOT aware of have not presented themselves to me. Thus....there are no hapless souls I'm aware of. Seems simple.
Now, the logic of why I say that is that Gmax works great. The business decisions made recently did not change the functionality of gmax. No users are inconvenienced. Future inconvenience is unknown for both tools.
Cheers,
Bob