MSFS Is there any reason not to use stock assets available in sdk other than for higher quality and / or higher accuracy of model / materials

[p919h_lm]

Hi,

I am new to this forum and creating scenery for MSFS. I see some scenery projects where custom models are used even if they are neither of higher quality compared to an equivalent stock object nor more accurate. I was wondering if there is any reason for not using the stock assets like say taxiway signs, light poles, plastic / metallic barriers etc. other than higher quality or more accuracy. Are the stock assets not optimized enough so that creating more optimized custom assets makes sense even if they don't look any better?

 

[Rotornut44]

I have seen stock assets that could definitely be better optimized, so that would be one reason. The other reason for me would be to have full control over the object, knowing you can make it how you want under your own workflow and you dont have to worry about that object being randomly altered in the future (Which has happened with a few stock assets I have used in the past, although it's not very common).

 

[p919h_lm]

I have seen stock assets that could definitely be better optimized, so that would be one reason. The other reason for me would be to have full control over the object, knowing you can make it how you want under your own workflow and you dont have to worry about that object being randomly altered in the future (Which has happened with a few stock assets I have used in the past, although it's not very common).

We'll, the point about having a stock asset change is really a good argument against using stock assets. Thanks for raising it.

I am creating a freeware scenery for a fairly big international airport, and have absolutely minimal blender skills and no texturing skils. I am trying to make the features like main terminal buildings, jetways and ATC tower as custom objects, but plan on using stock assets or assets from a freeware objects library for smaller things like barriers, hangars, traffic cones, ground clutter etc. I think this is the most optimal path for me to get it done in a reasonable amount of time.

 

[=rk=]

I have seen payware aircraft that use default Asobo assets, so I wouldn't worry about it. Optimization? Ya well it's free, so "you're welcome" kind of thing.

 

[rhumbaflappy]

There is no reason not to use the default objects.

 

[superspud]

Make a note of which package you're taking things from.

I occasionally forget that many of the Asobo packages are optional downloads and as time drags on everyone's install varies ever further. There might be juicy stuff from a custom Asobo airport that not many people have downloaded.

I can't think of many items that have been removed from the fs-base list but there have been a few. A baggage cart vanished leaving some luggage floating and they removed some frigate models. Let's hope it doesn't become a regular habit.

In general if a stock asset gets the job done then that would be my preference. I'll only create or find my own if I have a very specific look that's wanted and I'll have to want it rather badly considering the potential effort.

 

[rhumbaflappy]

There is supposed to be a Dependancy section in the package definition: https://docs.flightsimulator.com/ht...m?rhhlterm=dependencies&rhsearch=dependencies

But I don't think it works.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<AssetPackage Version="0.1.0">

    <ItemSettings>
        <ContentType>MISC</ContentType>
        <Title>Basic Lake Lawn</Title>
        <Manufacturer/>
        <Creator>rhumbaflappy</Creator>
    </ItemSettings>

    <Flags>
        <VisibleInStore>false</VisibleInStore>
        <CanBeReferenced>false</CanBeReferenced>
    </Flags>

    <Dependencies>
        <Dependency version="4.6.99">
            <Name>asobo-airport-kase-aspen</Name>
        </Dependency>
    </Dependencies>

    <AssetGroups>
        <AssetGroup Name="ContentInfo">
            <Type>ContentInfo</Type>
            <Flags>
                <FSXCompatibility>false</FSXCompatibility>
            </Flags>
            <AssetDir>PackageDefinitions\c59-lakelawn\ContentInfo\</AssetDir>
            <OutputDir>ContentInfo\c59-lakelawn\</OutputDir>
        </AssetGroup>
        <AssetGroup Name="myairports">
            <Type>BGL</Type>
            <Flags>
                <FSXCompatibility>false</FSXCompatibility>
            </Flags>
            <AssetDir>PackageSources\rhumbaflappy-c59-airport\</AssetDir>
            <OutputDir>scenery\rhumbaflappy\LakeLawn\</OutputDir>
        </AssetGroup>
    </AssetGroups>

</AssetPackage>

In the above, the package should require the asobo-airport-kase-aspen package, version 4.6.99 (which is not in the sim)... but the package and it's scenery show just fine from the Community folder.
Apparently, the presence of the dependency in the Manifest.json is just for information.