jormapaappa1235 wrote in Sat Apr 05, 2014 8:20 pm:I am trying to optimize this plane to run playable on ~9600gt and well on 2011-> computers. If I made cockpits to run on very low-end comps, there would be no evolve at all. Every single cockpit would look as good as the "normal" 777's one
I hope you understand.
You really should think about offering a low-detail version as well, so that people with machines that have low-end graphics at least have the option of using a version with an acceptable frame rate.
Some of us are more interested in how the simulated aircraft fly than on how they look. The machine I'm using is a 2011 MacBook Air. It only has an Intel HD Graphics 3000 integrated GPU, with no way to improve it. Many machines like that are out there, and while I understand why the FlightGear developers prefer to focus on taking advantage of the capabilities of high-end GPUs, they should also try to keep the more limited machines in mind.
(Yes, I know there is a standard response to avoid Intel graphics when running FlightGear, but I think this is too broad a restriction. Although it's true that earlier Intel GPUs have been extremely crippled and that Intel has had issues with its OpenGL support, I understand that this is less of a problem with newer hardware, like the HD Graphics 3000 series and later. Furthermore, since these newer GPUs are integrated into Intel's CPUs, they will inevitably be present in huge numbers of systems. In addition, I know some Linux users stick with Intel because its support for open-sourcing its graphics drivers is stronger than anyone else's. It seems to me that a free software project like FlightGear shouldn't discourage such potential advocates.)