Not sure about this new REX

Post and comment on screen captures from the beautiful game here. Home of the monthly screenshot competition

Postby Adamski » Mon May 21, 2012 11:30 pm

I'd be interested to see how they can improve on REX ...

It started out as a perfectly normal - if somewhat dull/overcast day ... somewhere near Omaka ...


Then the murk started lifting ...


... and you got this ...


... and this.


Nothing for it ... got to let the Lightning do what *IT* wants to do!


In case people forget what one of these looks like close up and personal!


I'd forgotten what a tremendous model the JF Lightning is (!!) ... and what surprises REX can have in store for you!
Image
User avatar
Adamski
NZFF Pro
 
Topic author
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:22 am
Posts: 5029
Location: Birkenhead, Auckland

Postby Olderndirt » Tue May 22, 2012 5:54 am

I agree. What we've got is perfectly fine and this forthcoming 'free' essential may be much ado about nothing. Like the close-up.
Image
User avatar
Olderndirt
Senior Member
 
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:36 pm
Posts: 1774
Location: Rochester, Washington USA

Postby Ian Warren » Tue May 22, 2012 10:47 am

Well strike a Lightning , will ya look at those clouds biggrin.gif
Image
User avatar
Ian Warren
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 5:23 pm
Posts: 41187
Location: AREA 51

Postby connor » Tue May 22, 2012 4:01 pm

Come on, lets show a bit of faith here, if they can do it once, they can do it twice!
connor
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 11:01 am
Posts: 1616
Location: Christchurch

Postby Splitpin » Tue May 22, 2012 8:39 pm

All superb shots thumbup1.gif 2 & 5 are super superb wub.gif
User avatar
Splitpin
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:15 pm
Posts: 21339
Location: Christchurch NZ

Postby Naki » Tue May 22, 2012 8:51 pm

Yeah Im wondering whether the latest REX will be one too far for my antiquated PC
Last edited by Naki on Tue May 22, 2012 8:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Naki
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 10:03 pm
Posts: 7170
Location: Tauranga

Postby Adamski » Tue May 22, 2012 9:46 pm

Naki wrote:
QUOTE (Naki @ May 22 2012,8:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Yeah Im wondering whether the latest REX will be one too far for my antiquated PC

Do you have the current REX running? I suspect they may do a similar thing - allow you to run it at 1024px, 2048px or 4096px size textures. If you can run the current one, I'll bet you'll be able to run the "update", but don't hold me to that laugh.gif.

Thanks for the comments, folks smile.gif
Image
User avatar
Adamski
NZFF Pro
 
Topic author
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:22 am
Posts: 5029
Location: Birkenhead, Auckland

Postby Naki » Tue May 22, 2012 11:17 pm

Yes currently have REX..Ive forgotten what settings I'm using ..probably just 1024 (how do you check?).....forgot to say those are nice pics!
User avatar
Naki
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 10:03 pm
Posts: 7170
Location: Tauranga

Postby Adamski » Wed May 23, 2012 12:35 am

Naki wrote:
QUOTE (Naki @ May 22 2012,11:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Yes currently have REX..Ive forgotten what settings I'm using ..probably just 1024 (how do you check?).....forgot to say those are nice pics!

There are two things you need to check:

1) When you create your textures in REX options - 3D Clouds and Cirrus Cloud Resolutions
2) In fsx.cfg you need to edit TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD to 1024, 2048, or 4096 - but keep checking the value as any Options changes made from within FSX will cause that to reset to 1024 (which'd be good in your case laugh.gif).

I hardly ever change my REX settings now - just let the REXWX engine do its stuff. Similarly, I hardly need to fiddle with my dispaly settings in FSX (famous last words!!!) so my TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD setting seems to last for a fair while.

To be perfectly honest, I don't see *that* much of a difference between 1024 and 2048 - they're just fluffy white things, after all winkyy.gif
Image
User avatar
Adamski
NZFF Pro
 
Topic author
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:22 am
Posts: 5029
Location: Birkenhead, Auckland

Postby connor » Wed May 23, 2012 7:58 am

Adamski wrote:
QUOTE (Adamski @ May 23 2012,12:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
To be perfectly honest, I don't see *that* much of a difference between 1024 and 2048 - they're just fluffy white things, after all winkyy.gif

I generally fly with 1024, because if a storm crops up I still want to have frames 10+! winkyy.gif
connor
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 11:01 am
Posts: 1616
Location: Christchurch


Return to Screenshots

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests