Jump to content

Michael_Chang

Members
  • Posts

    861
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    39

Everything posted by Michael_Chang

  1. Howard. I got two words for you. Prove it.
  2. A lot of these factors can be addressed by modifying your settings in XP. As for the VC stuff, having been a former flightgearer, I can vouch for the fact that these cockpits are much nicer.
  3. Not exactly what I flew, but I really want to share this pic XD
  4. Matthew is churning out beautiful paints for us! this is probably is best one yet!
  5. As these screens show, Matt and Peter are still hard at work to make this plane better, with Peter working on a surprise for all of us and Matt pushing out new paints!
  6. Sadly no, these screenshots are coming from my painter, Matthew Huerta
  7. Just rolled out of the paintshop today!
  8. From our facebook page For more photos of the 787 and progress updates, you should also go check out and like our facebook page! https://www.facebook.com/pages/FSXP-Studios/406978739369330
  9. it took me a second to realize that the pillar from the gate wasn't part of the plane... This thing looks amazing! out of curiosity, how heavy is the cockpit, in terms of polygons.
  10. Hey everyone, as you know, I have a 787 project that is about 60% done right now. However, while planning for the future of the project, I arrived at a snag in terms of design. The 787 has many lights in various positions (one on either side of the OH, the glare shield, floods, etc...) and many of them overlap in a few places. My question is, what is the best way to render out these multiple light levels without having to create more objects? Thanks ~Michael~
  11. excellent if you have any imperfections or issues, no matter the size, feel free to ask
  12. I believe that those weird shading lines are an issue with the UV projection/normal projection, so adding edgesplit modifiers will help determine whether or not it should be smooth or sharp, not wavy like it is now
  13. that account's been around since early march, that's a little more doubtful, i don't think he's the same
  14. no, they won't, that is a problem with normals, you need to highlight that mesh, and add the "edgesplit" modifier to the mesh. do this to all the meshes, and make sure you also "set smooth" all the meshes, so that the lines don't appear blocked.
  15. The boy's a nut! he's got 7 accounts that i counted thus far Erik Winter Patrick A320_NEO 737NG Mr. Smith Mr. Anderson Favourite Person on Earth he's absolutely cray-cray.
  16. our intentions were never to fully cancel projects. the post that involved the cancellation of any projects was a well-orchestrated april fools joke
  17. Anyone here good at gear up landings? XD... Amazing job mike, keep up the good work!
  18. I was merely suggesting that for other parts later on, the current fuselage polygon count is pretty good, it's just a reference for later, like perhaps on the engines. At this point, it's a little too late to make them into 64
  19. Looks good! don't be afraid to use more vertices, it really makes the plane smoother and makes the windows nicer. My preffered circle has 64 vertices on it. Also, just below the cockpit windows, see how there's a little hump in the shape of the lines of the wireframe? you should smooth that out in all dimensions for best UV reflection
  20. I think it may be a problem with your computer, as you're the only person to report this problem, and many others have downloaded it thus far
  21. you should do the old Aloha as well!
  22. dude. you ahve no idea how long i've been waiting for something like this! it's brilliant! thanks so much!
  23. could you display the nose with the wireframe/UV lines visible, i'd like to see how many vertices are being used.
  24. I would give it a 2.5/5 in terms of payware products, it's extremely low-polygon, but that's about it. There are massive innaccuracies in the plane, the kruegers are under-detailed and the plane is extremely primitive, which, given the creation time, is understandable. Flight model wise, it is acceptable, however I disagree with you in that it is worth the purchase. Purchasing this aircraft is no different than purchasing a toaster with the flight dynamics of a 747. The plane lacks proper texturing, and many parts are poorly animated and in need of a MAJOR facelift. The fuselage especially, needs work. the textures are very low-def and the plane needs new baking. Also worth noting is the presence of hard ridges and ugly lines, which need ot be updated. Knowing that he is still around, it would be advisable that he re-do the planes and re-sell them making them worth the price. it is NOT worth the get for a 747 lover IMO
×
×
  • Create New...