No you can still do it.

– The display-only G430 draws “emissively” since it’s a lit device.
– The background itself can be rendered translucent (I think).

I -think- only the emissive layer is off-screened…I realize now there’s a second reason for needing this: if over-draw is used on a translucent-output surface (which all dimmable lit instruments are) an off-screen must be used.

Someday, probably yes. Almost certainly not as just a static cube map – I think we’ll do something more modern.

austin at x-plane dot com.

I have a question, not related to scenery, but graphics in general: is there any future plan to support reflections on the objects shader? Even with only a static cubemap?

Cheers.

will 10.30 fix the replay problem?

My replay buffer currently only holds a few minutes, despite I have 32 GB RAM available and running the 64-bit XP 10.25. I have seen some forum comments stating that there is a maximum buffer size most likely hardcoded for this replay buffer. Might have made sense for 32-bit, but not for 64-bit systems with plenty of RAM.
Also I do not understand why that info is not simply saved to disk while I am flying. Should not be that much of an issue.

Hello Ben,
thanks, I thought so, but how do I email directly austin? the info@x-p…-adress?

Sorry Ben, this is not entirely correct … indeed I try to use some kind of density data, as far as it is available. But i can tell all of you, that this is an extremely massy part of the data. There is NO such thing, as a global, high resolution, high fidelity population data! Period! There are some useful information in the landclass of some regions (like the NLCD data in the USA has such information … or in aprts the Europesn CORINE data) … other regions have almost nothing … and i try to puzzle together halfway useful info from other 3rd party sources. I have some information in the “data sources” section on my website (look at “population density”):
http://www.alpilotx.net/downloads/x-plane-10-hd-scenery-mesh-v2/#Data-Sources-Acknowledgments

But its really really really hard to much up the different density classifications to a halfway useful “building height” info. I did already do a lot of heuristics, and the current state of things is the best thing i could come up … until now. This might of course improve in the future … when i get hold of better data, or have better ideas to interprete existing data.