Jump to content

MercuryMat

Members
  • Content Count

    153
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

24 Excellent

About MercuryMat

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 01/11/1978

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    LIMC

Recent Profile Visitors

3,879 profile views
  1. I got version 1 to 4. All of them promised something (a lot) that was simply not feasable and very, very, very heavy on system resources. I'm not expecting this version to be different and not meet the expectations, again. With SMP i always spent so much time trying to optimize it, because there is always something wrong, that in the end I just remove it forever...
  2. Actually I had some random crashes during flying, even in the middle of the sea with no dsf loading etc...so i tried reinstalling the software (and I suppose also the latest plugin) and nothing changed. Then I tried your plugin and everything seems to work normally now. Seems that the problem is still present with their plugin. Thanks for the solution
  3. Hi, Is this plugin still needed or the latest projectFLY plugin (5) works correctly?
  4. It is not exactly "correct"...even if all type of clouds are heavy on fps, with default clouds (or any manipulation of them) you can see clouds all over the horizon and on multiple layers but with less impact than with SMP. With SMP is practically impossible to extend the visual till the horizon. 10000sq is a good value, but is really really close to the aircraft. The trade-off is the visual appearance of the clouds and the distance you want to see them, depends what you like. What also hits a lot are the shadows and the reflections over water.
  5. I did not experience an improvement changing the clouds type (I think the fast are better than the crisp by the way). I experience better performances only after a system restart. My fps counter went back to original one...Not real-life better but at least the same.
  6. Yes...Strange. same for me. Performances becomes better after PC restart, but at the same level of smp3, not really improved. For the rest I agree, but SMP it is the only way to have decent weather representation in X-Plane without losing hours tweaking settings and other parameters...Scripts...Etc...
  7. OK, seems FSrealWX writes the METAR.rwx after some time. I tried RWC in always mode and seems that it reads the most recent metar it finds in the 2 files (metar.rwx and maxx_metar.rwx) and apply it to clouds. Is this correct? What is strange between the two files is the maxx_metar data are all one hour back compared to FSrealWX metar file, so I'm expecting RWC will read metar.rwx all the time instead maxx_metar.rwx. By the way it works in both modes. For future development you could consider to put different metar sources in RWC, like IVAO and VATSIM, for use in online flying.
  8. Seems that FSrealWX does not write any METAR file in X-Plane folder so I suppose it injects weather using datarefs. But using it flying online in IVAO I think the solution is to put RWC in auto mode even in this case. Am I correct?
  9. Sorry to say...big performance hit also for me...even with little coverage and same settings as SMP 3...I'm losing at least 10/15 FPS...and big graphic memory usage.
  10. Hi, Did you test RWC with FSrealWX plugin? For me it is not clear what option should be better to use. Auto or Always? Any advice?
  11. It is buggy...I bought on .org store (my first purchase years ago) so now I have the v1.7 available. I was unable to switch it on...may be I miss some library..but for sure the plane it is not perfectly tuned yet. I think developers will wait some days before releasing on all stores worldwide.
  12. Haha, in the screenshots the rain seems a nuclear fallout, but I suppose this are only sun reflections, may be too many?!?! By the way, after xEnviro big fail on pricing and not clear policies for future development I'll look forward this new version of SMP. Hope to see sparks in stable configurations of XP10. I'ts nice for XP11, but I suppose it will need some time to be really stable for this new platform.
  13. What a pity! May be it needed just a little tuning work.
×
×
  • Create New...